Mac Andrew | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • If you are having trouble logging in to the forum please contact [email protected] // When reseting your password or awaiting confirmation please check that your email is correct and also your junk/spam emails.
  • IMPORTANT! Our inbox is full of email errors from members who have not updated their emails, please follow the instructions on how to update here
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Mac Andrew

Dyer'ere

Licensed to kazoo
Sep 21, 2004
17,348
2,173
This fellow is an interesting prospect. Has anybody got any 20m numbers? Agility? Vertical leaps?

Possessions, positions/roles played, opponents?

Is there video around? Numbers?
 

bullus_hit

Whatchu talkin about Jack?
Apr 3, 2006
13,436
2,370
I'm on the fence with Andrew, he 200cm but a 70kg beanpole. I think to put on another 20kg at least will take another 4 years. By that stage a club will probably poach him for a lot cheaper than the initial outlay. Nothing against Mac as a prospect, he's a good one, but a top 5 pick is too much considering the risks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

TigerMasochist

Walks softly carries a big stick.
Jul 13, 2003
21,438
4,914
I'm on the fence with Andrew, he 200cm but a 70kg beanpole. I think to put on another 20kg at least will take another 4 years. By that stage a club will probably poach him for a lot cheaper than the initial outlay. Nothing against Mac as a prospect, he's a good one, but a top 5 pick is too much considering the risks.
Probably won't get anywhere near there bully, but would you consider him with our late first round pick?
 

bullus_hit

Whatchu talkin about Jack?
Apr 3, 2006
13,436
2,370
Probably won't get anywhere near there bully, but would you consider him with our late first round pick?
Yeah I would, he's in that upside project zone that I'd be willing to spend pick 17. This also means you don't lose on your investment, if he's any good a pick around 20 will be coming back (although pity about the lost development time). If he can play multiple positions you have the ideal back-up ruck so there's plenty of appeal. His skills are good for a big man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

TOT70

I'm just a suburban boy
Jul 27, 2004
9,443
2,495
Melbourne
I'm on the fence with Andrew, he 200cm but a 70kg beanpole. I think to put on another 20kg at least will take another 4 years. By that stage a club will probably poach him for a lot cheaper than the initial outlay. Nothing against Mac as a prospect, he's a good one, but a top 5 pick is too much considering the risks.
Which year should we trade for him, Bully?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

TigerMasochist

Walks softly carries a big stick.
Jul 13, 2003
21,438
4,914
I'd just be keeping tabs on his frame, 70kg is coming from a long way back.
Pretty sure Ayce Cordy was a similar size when he went F / S to the woofers years ago, around 2 metres tall n pencil thin, eventually filled out to about 100kegs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Dyer'ere

Licensed to kazoo
Sep 21, 2004
17,348
2,173
I just watched a minute highlight reel. I haven't done any form at all. In that reel Andrew identified a target almost immediately on getting the ball if not before. Target identification is a big deal. Maybe the biggest in terms of ball use. So now I'm going to do some homework.

If Mac Andrew is a ruck you'd be mad to take him at all much less in the first round. But if he's a dominant tall back he goes #4. Provided he tests for 20m.

The groundskills? The acquisition at ground level? The reach in the air. Then the target ID. The use. I'll start doing some homework.

This is an interesting prospect. Ya wanna drill down.

The 20m time matters a lot.
 

Dyer'ere

Licensed to kazoo
Sep 21, 2004
17,348
2,173
If he is 70kg, his 20m time aint anything like it will be when he is 100kg.
If he's 3.1 now that would mean that at a light playing weight, say 85kg, he will be very vulnerable to being run down, deedee. If he's 2.88 they won't get near him at any playing weight.

I'll be getting into the homework.

Don't forget that all the rule changes we've seen are mainly about reducing the AFL's exposure to CTE suits. Rather than aesthetics. Contact will steadily be reduced and probably removed from the game.

Mac Andrew is interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

tigerdell

Hope springs infernal
Mar 29, 2014
2,584
2,040
If he's 3.1 now that would mean that at a light playing weight, say 85kg, he will be very vulnerable to being run down, deedee. If he's 2.88 they won't get near him at any playing weight.

I'll be getting into the homework.

Don't forget that all the rule changes we've seen are mainly about reducing the AFL's exposure to CTE suits. Rather than aesthetics. Contact will steadily be reduced and probably removed from the game.

Mac Andrew is interesting.
200cm. But lighter than a summer nightie.
Where does he play?
Ruck? 200cm is short now, though he'll have the leap. But the Titans such as IVAN SOLDO will wear him down and brutalise him.
Near the goals? Not as a forward without awareness and instinct.
As a key back. Maybe he could be an ultra tall 3rd man up. But as a key tall the Tom Lynch's of the world will outbody and outclunk him.

Aesthetics be dammed, contact will be reduced. Valuable insight.
But it doesnt hold for ruck contests or big man pack marks.

I'm working on an update to the maxim: when faced with a choice between a tall and a small, choose the tall.
But what if the tall is a Beanpole?
Remember the 2013 Grand final where Luke Hodge stood Zac Clarke, a deadset foot shorter and towelled him up.
If the tall is a beanpole choose the short-arsed footballer.

#truth is i'm a beanpole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Dyer'ere

Licensed to kazoo
Sep 21, 2004
17,348
2,173
I am certain, td, that as a ruck Mac Andrew is deeply uninteresting and if that's his future he is strictly a rookie. Ruck, yeah, nah.

He is on the radar because he's a striking athlete with what appears to be a very high IQ in terms of his plan for the ball.

I'm beginning to think that his athleticism as much as his physique is a query.

As for his predicted shape/size, I think that's largely knowable. Siblings, parents, parents' siblings.

He went to combine. But didn't show up in the 20m. And not in the jumps.

GWS has access to all this information and I cred the notion that Andrew is in the mix for #4. I'd like to see the numbers. Nik Cox, a comparable prospect, IMO, hit 80cm in the running vertical. I think Nik Cox is an elite running/zoning back prospect. And that's what Mac Andrew looks like to me at the first few viewings.

FWIW I'm beginning to think his running jump is the most interesting number. Then the other jumps, then the 20m.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

spook

Tiger Legend
Jun 18, 2007
15,923
11,219
Melbourne
Andrew's leap looks decent without being outstanding. But he does have long arms. He looks pretty quick but I wouldn't think sub-3 for 20.

I'm a fan of his football. Never fewer than 12 disposals in 5 NAB games (apart from doughnuts v Gippsland in r9 - injured?) with a high of 22 against the Power in r2. Good performances for the AIS and Vic Country. Wants the ball, good user/decision maker. Good hands. Neat kick.

Agree, Jack, more interesting as a zoning back with a ceiling as a forward option, than as a ruck.

70kg has been quoted in every article about him all year, so we can safely assume that was his weight at the start of season testing (Feb/March). If he's not 80 or close to it by now, then there are alarm bells.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

King Kong

Tiger Champion
Aug 26, 2016
3,877
2,671
I'm on the fence with Andrew, he 200cm but a 70kg beanpole. I think to put on another 20kg at least will take another 4 years. By that stage a club will probably poach him for a lot cheaper than the initial outlay. Nothing against Mac as a prospect, he's a good one, but a top 5 pick is too much considering the risks.
Not sure why their is an obsession with being 100kg as a ruckman. In Andrews case he'll jump over the top of the opposition and the days of one on one contests in the forward line are long gone. Charlie Dixon, Lynch, Hawkins etc are not as effective as Fritsch now because they are too heavy. The game has evolved into keepings off hence bulk is now a hinderance. The King twins are the perfect size now and Andrew will be also.

Chol was 93kg and CCJ 104kg. Chol was far more effective in the ruck
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

bullus_hit

Whatchu talkin about Jack?
Apr 3, 2006
13,436
2,370
Not sure why their is an obsession with being 100kg as a ruckman. In Andrews case he'll jump over the top of the opposition and the days of one on one contests in the forward line are long gone. Charlie Dixon, Lynch, Hawkins etc are not as effective as Fritsch now because they are too heavy. The game has evolved into keepings off hence bulk is now a hinderance. The King twins are the perfect size now and Andrew will be also.
Need to go back and revise your maths KK, 70 + 20 = 90, that would be the bare minimum for a ruck. Have seen a number of these athletic types flounder despite looking like diamonds at junior level. Think it's better to get the big lads and trim them down like Darcy, have slightly altered my metrics over the years because all the best rucks are heavy weights. I think we've moved on from spending top 5 picks on skinny athletic rucks, a bit different if you want him as a key position prospect but there are no guarantees. Fine for a late first round selection but mega risky as a top 5 pick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

deedee

Tiger Matchwinner
Sep 12, 2011
589
498
Usain Bolt says hi
Do you really think a 70kg ruckman and a 70kg sprinter would build up bulk in the same way? Maybe a 70kg sprinter would concentrate on a gym routine that enhances his speed, and maybe a 70kg ruckman would be using the gym to make it harder to be pushed of the ball or man handled in a rucking or marking contest, but what would I know I'm no expert I'm just a keyboard warrior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user