Midfield Trade Targets

agreed. You’ve mentioned in other threads about trying Begley in the backline. Maybe it’s not out of the question for Laverde either

1 Like

Point taken, but I don’t think Lav was ever “meant” to be played as a 4th tall, in Green’s spot.

We just had Fanta, Green, Jerrett and Long all injured at basically the same time, and because we didn’t want to pick the (still fairly large) Begley until we had no other options at all, Lav was our closest approximation of a small forward.

Ideally Lav develops into a big midfielder or wing. Whether that happens or not is anyone’s guess.

An area I wouldn’t mind us adding extra depth (perhaps through Long’s promotion as mooted by fogdog)

1 Like

I don’t recall Long being injured. He got suspended right at the end but anyway.

For me it’s not about the player but the role that they are performing. Howlett for example has performed the defensive forward many times over his career but I think that Woosha just likes mobile/leading types.

Yes you’re right, he was rubbed out for almost all the finals. Regardless, we were very very short on options at small forward. Lav kicks 7? in the reserves, right when we need a small forward, I can see what they were going for.

Certainly better than the mad 5 year experiment of playing Howlett forward.

1 Like

I think it was vs Port that Howlett streamed into F50 twice with short options on, and kicked long to where Port had all the options. Hanging on by his finger-nails at the moment.

1 Like

I reckon if Stringer can’t play 50/50 midfield then it’s Stewart who will miss out.

It’s going to be an interesting decision. I’m confident Stringer can play significant midfield minutes.

Stewart I think we need to persist with. He’s young and mobile and is at least a couple of years away from his peak.

6 Likes

What about Stewart running through the midfield like a Blicavs type role

1 Like

Would be pretty funny. His contested work is pretty fkn awesome though. Always gets his arms up to dish off

1 Like

I think if as stringer chooses us it will push Stewart into the legit contested marking forward role. Jake will play HF rotating into the middle, and I think the coaches hope Laverde also plays this role in sync with Stringer.

Can he actually do this though?

From everything I have seen, he doesn’t strike me as a great or even decent contested marker of the footy? Certainly not as good as what Cale can.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for Hooker going back as I think that is where he is most valuable to the team, I just don’t see how Stewart is going to replace his contributions up forward, you just have to look at the Elimination Final against the Swans to see how we went structurally up forward without Cale there.

5 Likes

If we get him I want Stringer to play as a wrecking ball coming off the wing and smashing into ■■■■■■, and running out the other side with the ball.

He could do this and drift forward or run out the back as required but I think his biggest benefit could be a physical threat and presence through the midfield that makes opposition think where is Stringer rather than tagging the ■■■■ out of Zerret or Zaha.

5 Likes

It’s a pretty ridiculous assertion to say IF there were no injuries he wouldn’t have been picked at the end of the year, completing ignoring the fact that Laverde’s form was a direct result of a very severe injury of his own. He was in a boot for 3 months FFS.
IF there were no injuries, then Laverde’s form was likely a truckload better and may well have been in the side all along.
We’ll know more next year either way.

3 Likes

Hall

I like the thought of Hall.

Pretty sure Langford will miss out.

If we can do it ?
they just belted 3 top 4 sides, and you’re saying if ?

and it’s not even a “richmond” thing, it’s the blueprint the dogs used, and the hawks have used. hell even Adealide use it.

and our best games this year where ironically where we did apply said manic pressure, geelong, wc and port.
We just don’t have a team who is either capable or willing to do it 23 weeks of the year.

It’s mind boggling that anyone would be saying if we hit our targets richmonds pressure is usless (or anyone in that situation).
they just proved that if any team from year to year brings that maniac pressure it can crumble any opposition side.
Hell people have said they are the worst premiership side ever, yet again they just pantsed 3 of the other top 4 sides, who are better skilled than us.

But you still want to run with, oh if teams hit their targets their game becomes useless.

Also the dogs did it coming from 7th spot on the ladder, something that’s never been done before.
richmond did it with how many guys who people claim are spuds ? or early into their careers.

Not sure what you expect from this team after only their first year together completely? It took Richmond 8 years to get to this position.

2 Likes

You’ve got to be in before you can miss out.

1 Like

This is the biggest fallacy going around.

Richmond did not take 8 years to build up to this years win. They were just bang average for YEARS… Until Dimma identified their list and game plan was not going to get it done. He changed both and this years cattle and endeavour basically did it. Yes they had Cotch, Jack, Rance and Dusty so they had the core… The players they brought in had the application previous players did not have… And the pace to stick it.

Their application to the game plan, smalls introduced and Caddy, Nank and Prestia got it done.

2 Likes