List build - where are we? Where are we going next


#2696

Comments:

  • I agree on shopping Colyer around, although he might at best get a 4th => 3rd round upgrade (IMO). More about releasing list space.
  • I’ve already mentioned the ruck situation above.
  • With McNiece, even if he earns an upgrade, you can now give him more money and keep him on the rookie list. I would think we would do so.
  • I don’t see why Bags would go from being best 22 ahead of Colyer, Green right now, to being delisted. If nobody can force him out now, why weaken the side by delisting him?
  • Given our concerns over tall defenders going forward (i.e. post Hurley/Hooker) and Ambrose’s fragile body, I think it isn’t a great move to cut Hartley. At least wait until Zerk/Francis are more proven.

#2697

Maric and the Russian were break glass options in their last years, I think Luey could stay on one more year. I’m with you on not going after a mediocre ruckman, either keep Luey one more year or risk it.
Daniher is another option who played ruck his whole junior career and the argument of not putting your best player in the ruck because of injury is a crap argument because he’s just as likely getting injured at full forward.


#2698

I’d note the Russian was never properly on our list. He was our ruck coach, and got added as part of the additional players allowed in 2016.


#2699

For Melbourne.


#2700

He was their #2 ruck and they didn’t have much after him by memory. Start of that year, wasn’t he #1 in fact?

Nobody is saying have no depth. But we will still have Draper and McKernan, that’s not an issue for us.


#2701

The ruck situation is interesting. I think it’s risky to go with just 3 guy’s capable of rucking (TBell, Smack, Draper).

A lot depends on where the club sees NewLAV and his likely long term position. If they see him as a ruck or a forward/ruck, then hopefully next year he starts to get a fair bit of time in that role once Looney is gone.
If they see him as purely a forward or a defender, then we need to add a 4th ruck, or ideally a forward/ruck.


#2702

In modern football you think having 3 guys for 1 position isn’t enough?


#2703

They just seem more at risk of injury, although I guess it hasn’t been a problem for us in recent seasons.

It may also depend on the anti-congestion changes and whether anything they introduce triggers a change back to some clubs playing 2 ruckmen regularly.

If we add a 4th i’d prefer it to be a developing forward/ruck… ie primarily a forward who can pinch hit ruck. But if they see NewLAV doing that, then we can replace Looney with a running player.


#2704

He wanted out but stayed on to support Gawn and another guy who was battling it out, king maybe?
I think you have more faith than I in Draper next year and Mckernan as a ruckman. Not replacing Luey would be a risk but a risk worth taking and I’d base my argument on Daniher being a handy ruck option.


#2705

Does playing in the ruck put more stress on Daniher’s groin? If so, i’d Never play him there again.

I’m not keen to play Daniher in the ruck regardless. Which is why I want another forward/ruck developing on the list


#2706

Fast forward a couple of years…and we could be down to one decent ruck, Draper.


#2707

I had a listen mate - and they sounded nice, so I hung on for about 10 minutes. But to be honest - they are so far away from understanding our list, that it’s pretty much pointless - and actually misleading. I like how there are all these podcasts to listen to - but they really should do some in-depth research so as not to kill their audience so early in the piece.


#2708

As you said earlier it’s an interesting situation. Especially short term because another developing tall will have little impact over the next two years. As for Daniher it would be really disappointing if he can no longer play ruck at all because if that’s the case he’d have a limit on his overall output even if he was used exclusively as a forward.


#2709

I’m ok with keeping Leuey for one more year to mentor Draper and LAV2.0 and cover at senior level if required. Drop him to the rookie list if we need the list spot, pay him something reasonable but not overs. He’s saying his job is now to teach Draper, there’s value for us in having him around a little longer.


#2710

Playing a KPF in the ruck is one of the best ways to get them going when they are having a hard time of it up forward.

I think it would be better for the groins as opposed to having to quickly sprint, turn, jump etc but hopefully once his groins are right then they won’t be a consideration again.


#2711

Man the guy with the higher voice has absolutely no clue about anything. The other guy seems OK.
Still, didn’t seem like either of them did more than 2 minutes of research - Stewart’s out with an injury (??), Laverde is just bad at footy, McGrath’s just a back flanker, Draper was a mature age, McNeice is being chased for his experience. On and on and on.
Oh and pick 16 is over rated, pick 32 is under rated. Of course we’ve had all the over rated ones.

It’s like picking any two random idiots from a match day thread and getting them to record a podcast. About Carlton.


#2713

Yes, but you’ve got several years to fix that. And plenty of teams now plunder other teams for rucks, its quite common. Look at Jacobs, Witts, Nankervis, Ryder, etc. Probably Preuss this year. When Belly is closer to the end, especially if Draper is still uncertain, rucks will be more interested in us.

And I’ve no issue with drafting a ruck/forward, as that covers both areas.

My impression from things I’ve read here is that Leuy will pull the pin.


#2714

Completely understand if he does retire. But if he’s happy to stay, he’d be useful.


#2715

You’re not as nice as me.


#2716

I still hold good faith in Laverde, i hope we persist.