Midaro's List Analysis (1-20)

[midaro]

Originally posted by sharp9
Mathews had another "normal' game for him....
<SNIP>

Sharp9's description is closer to my impression of Mathews.
When I think of how he plays, this scenario comes to mind...

Schauble/Barry/C Bolton have won the ball, deep in the D50.
The ball is kicked to Mathews (by himself) on the 50.
He plays on, moving at quarter pace.
...holds it ...holds it.
He shields his eyes as he looks up the ground.
...holds it ...holds it.
He is challenged by an opponent.
He handballs to someone under pressure.
There's a chain of about six handballs in quick succession plus numerous tackles and bumps as we desperately regain control.
Now it's back with Mathews on the 50.
He plays on, moving at half pace.
...holds it ...holds it.
He shields his eyes as he looks up the ground.
...holds it ...holds it.
He kicks a 35m floater to a contest on the wing.
Throw in on the wing.

Summary: 1 mark, 1 kick, 7 handballs, 5 tackes = 35m to little advantage.
...but it's just an impression, I will watch him more carefully from now on.

[midaro]

Originally posted by Wazza
"My best case realistic trade for this year would be:
OUT: O'Keefe + Fosdike
IN: M McVeigh + Hayes (Not sure of contract status)"

There is no way anyone would trade O,Keefe for McVeigh??

I'm not saying O'Keefe for McVeigh (that would be insane).

I'm saying of those who I've decribed as tradeable, O'Keefe + Fosdike may have equivalent trade value to M McVeigh + Hayes (or Kerr or Fletcher or any number of good young midfielders).
Such a trade might actually involve numerous clubs and draft picks.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by sharp9
Mathews had another "normal' game for him....around 20 possessions, 4 or 5 of them really good ones, some good tackles keeping his man reltatively quiet, and 7 or 8 shocking disposals and poor efforts resulting in 3 goals to the opposition.

That sums him up to some degree. A fairly frustrating player at times.

I used to bag Mathews mercilessly about two years ago, and copped a lot of flak for doing so.

Last year I thought he improved a lot. This year he is mixed.

At times he plays really well - finds space and delivers the ball perfectly. Other times he fumbles, mangles the ball sideways 20m or just doesn't know what to do.

He usually plays reasonably well defensively, although I've seen him towelled up a couple of times.

Really not sure as sometimes he seems like he will be a valuable player but then he lets you down.

[Nico]

Anyone who even remotely suggests we trade Micky and O'Keefe knows nothing about football talent.

[Ryan Bomford]

Originally posted by midaro
The ball is kicked to Mathews (by himself) on the 50.
He plays on, moving at quarter pace.
...holds it ...holds it.
He shields his eyes as he looks up the ground.
...holds it ...holds it.
He is challenged by an opponent.

Midaro, you forgot this detail: While holding the ball and shielding his eyes he fails to see, and/or purposefully dishonours the hard running leads of three teammates who are 10 metres clear of their opponent .. hence the hurried handball to a teammate under pressure.

[hammo]

Originally posted by Nico
Anyone who even remotely suggests we trade Micky and O'Keefe knows nothing about football talent.

I agree Nico

[midaro]

Originally posted by Nico
Anyone who even remotely suggests we trade Micky and O'Keefe knows nothing about football talent.

If your criticism relates to trading both Micky and O'Keefe at the same time - yes, that would be idiotic. Changing a strength into a weakness like that would be madness.

...but if you're saying that we shouldn't trade talent fullstop, I think you're being naive. Sacrificing O'Keefe to get a gun midfielder - and therefore more supply to Hall, O'Loughlin & Davis - would be sound strategy.

[robbieando]

Originally posted by midaro
...but if you're saying that we shouldn't trade talent fullstop, I think you're being naive. Sacrificing O'Keefe to get a gun midfielder - and therefore more supply to Hall, O'Loughlin & Davis - would be sound strategy.

But if O'Loughlin's knee finally gives way we have no real replacement for him - thats NOT sound strategy.

[midaro]

Originally posted by robbieando
But if O'Loughlin's knee finally gives way we have no real replacement for him - thats NOT sound strategy.

You could make that argument for every position on the ground, and therefore never be able to trade.

If Barry Hall does his knee in Round 1 we have no replacement at all. Schauble either (IMO much of our trouble this year can be attributed to his absence). If any of those things happen, our team would suffer - no question.

If we traded O'Keefe, for Hayes/Fletch/Kerr then O'Loughlin was lost to injury, would we be any worse off than if we didn't trade O'Keefe and O'Loughlin was lost to injury?

I'd back a forward line with Hall, Davis, Schneider and 10+% more inside 50s, to kick more goals than Hall, Davis, Schneider, O'Keefe and our current midfield.

[robbieando]

Originally posted by midaro
If Barry Hall does his knee in Round 1 we have no replacement at all. Schauble either (IMO much of our trouble this year can be attributed to his absence). If any of those things happen, our team would suffer - no question.

No doubt about that, but then again we aren't talking of trading Hall and Schauble.

If we traded O'Keefe, for Hayes/Fletch/Kerr then O'Loughlin was lost to injury, would we be any worse off than if we didn't trade O'Keefe and O'Loughlin was lost to injury?

Of course we will be worse off. Even worse off if Hall were to then get injuried. Face it, our attack is our strong point when they are all together. When 1 or 2 of them miss and Hall is forced back towards the goal square we fall apart. Why brake up a strong point of the side????

I'd back Hall, Davis & Schneider to kick more goals with 10% more inside 50s, than Hall, Davis, O'Keefe & Schneider with our current midfield.

I sure as hell wouldn't because one of Hayes/Fletch/Kerr won't mean a 10% rise of Inside 50 for starters. The bonus of our forward line is the fact we don't need Barry Hall to play a true Full Forwards position because we can push him up the ground to CHF and allow Magic and O'Keefe to use the space behind him to good effect. Without Magic and/or O'Keefe, Barry can't play up the ground as we would like, thus forcing him to camp 30m out from goal and get double or even triple teamed which Hall has shown he can't handle or cope with, nobody can.

So with Hall not kicking as many goals as we would like and needing Davis and Schneider to cover the amount of goals that Magic and O'Keefe would normally kick as well as their own, I wouldn't bet on a forward line of Hall, Schneider and Davis kicking more goals than one with both O'Keefe and Magic in it.

Anyway you don't trade well performing players unless they want to move back to their home state. Brisbane didn't become the force they are today by doing what your suggesting. You trade the likes of Saddo, Fosdike and Ablett, not a O'Keefe.

[midaro]

Originally posted by robbieando

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by midaro
If Barry Hall does his knee in Round 1 we have no replacement at all. Schauble either (IMO much of our trouble this year can be attributed to his absence). If any of those things happen, our team would suffer - no question.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No doubt about that, but then again we aren't talking of trading Hall and Schauble.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by midaro
If we traded O'Keefe, for Hayes/Fletch/Kerr then O'Loughlin was lost to injury, would we be any worse off than if we didn't trade O'Keefe and O'Loughlin was lost to injury?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course we will be worse off. Even worse off if Hall were to then get injuried. Face it, our attack is our strong point when they are all together. When 1 or 2 of them miss and Hall is forced back towards the goal square we fall apart. Why brake up a strong point of the side????

I don't WANT to break up a strong point of the side, but I'd be prepared to sacrifice in an area of plenty (the forward line), to bolster an area of need (the midfield). IMO Hayes/Fletcher/Kerr would be more valuable to OUR team, than O'Keefe.

Originally posted by robbieando

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by midaro
I'd back Hall, Davis & Schneider to kick more goals with 10% more inside 50s, than Hall, Davis, O'Keefe & Schneider with our current midfield.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I sure as hell wouldn't because one of Hayes/Fletch/Kerr won't mean a 10% rise of Inside 50 for starters. The bonus of our forward line is the fact we don't need Barry Hall to play a true Full Forwards position because we can push him up the ground to CHF and allow Magic and O'Keefe to use the space behind him to good effect. Without Magic and/or O'Keefe, Barry can't play up the ground as we would like, thus forcing him to camp 30m out from goal and get double or even triple teamed which Hall has shown he can't handle or cope with, nobody can.

So with Hall not kicking as many goals as we would like and needing Davis and Schneider to cover the amount of goals that Magic and O'Keefe would normally kick as well as their own, I wouldn't bet on a forward line of Hall, Schneider and Davis kicking more goals than one with both O'Keefe and Magic in it.

You must have a higher opinion of our midfield than I do. IMO Hayes/Fletcher/Kerr would easily up our inside 50s +10%. We're one of the worst in the league in this stat (anyone got a source?)

As for O'Keefe playing behind Hall, it doesn't really happen. O'Keefe gets most of his possessions outside 50.
Compare: O'Keefe 300 touches, 28 goals. Hall 300 touches, 68 goals.
IMO if O'Loughlin was injured, Davis would be a better bet at FF than O'Keefe.

So going back to your hypothetical of O'Loughlin getting injured after we've traded O'Keefe, we have:
Hall, Davis, Schneider + Hayes/Fletcher/Kerr
VERSUS
Hall, Davis, Schneider + O'Keefe

I guess the question becomes; how good is O'Keefe?
He's kicked 28 goals in 21 matches this year as a HFF, but...
he'll never be a KPP, he's not a midfielder, and he's already had one knee reco. He is a very good player and at 23 will could potentially kick 30-35 goals a year for the next 7-10 years.

Hayes/Fletcher/Kerr (or Bruce/Johnson/Green/Haselby/etc) are probably worth about 10 goals a year, directly. So the difference is about 20-25 goals a year, (1 goal a game on average). But, with extra inside 50s due to their ability to get and use the ball, plus the fact that some talent on the ball could actually change our game-plan back to free-flowing (from the Eade-esque defensiveness it has reverted to) - Hayes/Fletcher/Kerr could easily better O'Keefe's imput.

Originally posted by robbieando

Anyway you don't trade well performing players unless they want to move back to their home state. Brisbane didn't become the force they are today by doing what your suggesting. You trade the likes of Saddo, Fosdike and Ablett, not a O'Keefe.

Agree (except I don't think we'd get a can of coke for Ablett). I'd be happy if we didn't trade and only took the mandatory 3 at the draft. All this is just exploring the possibilities.

[Snowy]

the other option is to play Davis as a permanent midfielder and allow O'Keefe to float between the two roles. In 2001 he played mainly as an on-baller and kicked 36 goals while averaging lots of possessions.