Rd 3 vs Western Bulldogs @ Marvel - Pre-Game Thread

[barracuda]

Not sure that I like Paps for Wicks. Very different roles. Wicks cops a bit, but he is playing as a pressure forward, and does lots that does not pick up a stat (even 1%ers). Paps is an attacking weapon and crumber, waiting for the ball to be brought to ground by the big targets (and of course weaving his magic in other ways). Wicks has to position himself in other parts of the arc to block exits, and then close quickly to force errors and shut down angles, pushing defenders deep into pockets. I know that not everyone agrees with this, and I'm bracing for impact.

Rather than thinking like-for-like, the calculation will be about the balance of the forward six: how many talls, how many small play-makers, how many pressure forwards.

A forward line of Franklin, McLean, Hayward, Gulden, Papley and Wicks? With Parker and Heeney rotating forward? Is Hayward under pressure for his place in the team?

I was at the last two games. He did an excellent job with a hard, physical tag on whitfield (GWS), who had to be moved forward to get any ball. Against Geelong he was equal highest for swans tackles with Heeney, third highest for swans pressure acts, ran third highest distance for the swans, third highest total distance covered at high speed for swans and third highest average speed for swans.

Watching him, he is the one gut running to cover the opposition running half backs and preventing the slingshot goals. It has to be the least glamorous role in footy, and requires incredible discipline to sacrifice yourself.

Last year the swans ran with only two forward talls. This year they are running with three. If they keep the taller structure then wicks will make way for papley, however someone will need to step up to play the defensive forward role (which papley would never do) or the swans will be very vulnerable on turnover.

[bloodspirit]

Thanks for those insightful posts, O'Reilly Boy and barracuda. Maybe it will be Papley for McDonald or McLean when the time comes. We might be running the extra tall because​ Papley is unavailable.

[i'm-uninformed2]

I was at the last two games. He did an excellent job with a hard, physical tag on whitfield (GWS), who had to be moved forward to get any ball. Against Geelong he was equal highest for swans tackles with Heeney, third highest for swans pressure acts, ran third highest distance for the swans, third highest total distance covered at high speed for swans and third highest average speed for swans.

Watching him, he is the one gut running to cover the opposition running half backs and preventing the slingshot goals. It has to be the least glamorous role in footy, and requires incredible discipline to sacrifice yourself.

Last year the swans ran with only two forward talls. This year they are running with three. If they keep the taller structure then wicks will make way for papley, however someone will need to step up to play the defensive forward role (which papley would never do) or the swans will be very vulnerable on turnover.

Papley wouldn't do it, and nor should he.

With a three tall structure, what you correctly outline about Wicks' role and effort actually makes him even more valuable.

[SwanSand]

I was at the last two games. He did an excellent job with a hard, physical tag on whitfield (GWS), who had to be moved forward to get any ball. Against Geelong he was equal highest for swans tackles with Heeney, third highest for swans pressure acts, ran third highest distance for the swans, third highest total distance covered at high speed for swans and third highest average speed for swans.

Watching him, he is the one gut running to cover the opposition running half backs and preventing the slingshot goals. It has to be the least glamorous role in footy, and requires incredible discipline to sacrifice yourself.

Last year the swans ran with only two forward talls. This year they are running with three. If they keep the taller structure then wicks will make way for papley, however someone will need to step up to play the defensive forward role (which papley would never do) or the swans will be very vulnerable on turnover.

We are a better team than many give us credit for because of role players like Wicks. Completely agree with what you have to say. This is also the reason why Lewis Taylor is not getting a game as Wicks is doing heaps more than what Taylor can do without the ball. The only knock on Wicks is that by his own standards his disposals efficiency and kicking for goals is down this year compared to last. And he needs to get better at it for the teams sake.
I don’t think you can swap Wicks out. It probably would be Kennedy/Campbell/Stephens/Rowbottom who get squeezed out once Mcinerney and Papley are back. I think it would end up being - Campbell and Stephens will go to the bench. Or in NM game it may end up being Kennedy on the bench.

I know that some of you have mentioned about Hayward not going well. But is that role one of the most difficult roles to play. Unlike Wicks, with whom we are happy with pressure acts, we want the medium forward to do everything - kick goals, stop intercepts, provide pressure and also get ground balls and probably chop out in defence. I am not sure how he is going but the coaching seem to be ok with how he is going.

[Auntie.Gerald]

if players like Campbell keep moving on the same trajectory it will be impossible to keep them out of the 22.

Its one thing to have a good pressure forward but if your backline is so creative and rebounding so quick than it makes the forward pressure roles so much easier and less dependent on one pressure forward.

There is an opportunity cost for every role on the field.........but it is very possible in the near future we may rotate that pressure role with a bunch of mids rotating thru the forward line......ie 10mins at a time only via Parker, Warner, Ollie etc

i completely respect the advantages a team gains via minimising the impact of a dangerous HBF ....... but curtailing their impact does not have to be achieved via one player alone

[TheBloods]

We are a better team than many give us credit for because of role players like Wicks. Completely agree with what you have to say. This is also the reason why Lewis Taylor is not getting a game as Wicks is doing heaps more than what Taylor can do without the ball. The only knock on Wicks is that by his own standards his disposals efficiency and kicking for goals is down this year compared to last. And he needs to get better at it for the teams sake.
I don’t think you can swap Wicks out. It probably would be Kennedy/Campbell/Stephens/Rowbottom who get squeezed out once Mcinerney and Papley are back. I think it would end up being - Campbell and Stephens will go to the bench. Or in NM game it may end up being Kennedy on the bench.

I know that some of you have mentioned about Hayward not going well. But is that role one of the most difficult roles to play. Unlike Wicks, with whom we are happy with pressure acts, we want the medium forward to do everything - kick goals, stop intercepts, provide pressure and also get ground balls and probably chop out in defence. I am not sure how he is going but the coaching seem to be ok with how he is going.

Campbell and Stephens will play every week unless they need a rest . They are in our best 22 and are showing it now . Kennedy as well ,Horse would rather use him in different positions than drop him. He wont be dropped , end of .

[graemed]

Nobody has mentioned Ladhams. If Buddy is rested, or McDonald dropped, then he could come in rather than Armetey. Ladhams seemed to have a pretty good VFL game based on the highlights.

I watched the whole game and while both Ladhams and Armetey played forward. McAndrew did almost all the contested ruck work against Stef Martin. Moreover, I would expect Martin to play this week and allow English to play forward especially if there is some doubt about Naughton.

When Ladhams played on the ball it was noticeable he contested well but lacked the wherewithal when in defence. Armetey, too was used ver infrequently in the ruck and was clearly in the game to get match fitness. He was most dangerous early in the game and faded later.

Bell, Gould, Melican and Geddes were amongst our best.

[bloodspirit]

Wow! We've really elevated the level of discussion here. Great analysis a welcome break from some of the other stuff that goes on. (Not that I'm contributing much except some appreciation.)

[Ludwig]

It's hard to get a clear evaluation of Gould and Ladhams, as there isn't a VFL game replay, I believe.

I think both of them have a few things on their side: athleticism, marking ability and kicking. Other aspects, like work rate and decision making, are still to be determined. We will just have to see how the season unfolds.

They both seemed to play good 2nd halves. I liked Gould's game a lot, but I was focusing more on the positives than looking for negatives. Same with Ladhams. I more hoping they will work out rather than being convinced they will. Verdict still out. But I wouldn't mind seeing either in the AFL game.

It's already Tuesday and still waiting for a VFL game review from Friday. Is it asking too much? And when they do come, there's usually not much substance to them.

[SwanSand]

if players like Campbell keep moving on the same trajectory it will be impossible to keep them out of the 22.

Its one thing to have a good pressure forward but if your backline is so creative and rebounding so quick than it makes the forward pressure roles so much easier and less dependent on one pressure forward.

There is an opportunity cost for every role on the field.........but it is very possible in the near future we may rotate that pressure role with a bunch of mids rotating thru the forward line......ie 10mins at a time only via Parker, Warner, Ollie etc

i completely respect the advantages a team gains via minimising the impact of a dangerous HBF ....... but curtailing their impact does not have to be achieved via one player alone

On the one hand our f50 entries are low, our turnover game is not in full gear yet, and we are low in intercept marks, on the other hand we have very creative players everywhere who are playing amazingly well and hitting targets. The shining light is in our efficiency inside f50 and our ground ball gets in f50.

However I am sure there is a balance which if broken we may find ourselves in a bit of a slump.

There is a lot to improve on.

Doesn’t sound like there is any need to change the team this week unless Buddy wants a rest after all the celebrations. Would love to see Mcinerney back in line though if he is fit.

[AB Swannie]

I get Wicks plays a role in our team. However, there seems to be an inference that no one else can do that role if he wan't in the team. Why can't Gulden put pressure on and kick straight? Why can't Parker, Warner, Campbell et al put pressure on and kick straight. In most years, Wicks would be an easy selection but this year you have to be in top form to keep your place in our team. At the moment, there are higher performing players.

[Foreign Legion]

It's hard to get a clear evaluation of Gould and Ladhams, as there isn't a VFL game replay, I believe.

I think both of them have a few things on their side: athleticism, marking ability and kicking. Other aspects, like work rate and decision making, are still to be determined. We will just have to see how the season unfolds.

They both seemed to play good 2nd halves. I liked Gould's game a lot, but I was focusing more on the positives than looking for negatives. Same with Ladhams. I more hoping they will work out rather than being convinced they will. Verdict still out. But I wouldn't mind seeing either in the AFL game.

It's already Tuesday and still waiting for a VFL game review from Friday. Is it asking too much? And when they do come, there's usually not much substance to them.

G'day Ludwig - you should be able to watch the full VFL game here:
VFL Match Replay, R1: Footscray v Sydney

I was at the ground and Gould does look very fit. I was surprised how much of a talker - in a good way - that Melican is.