Our key backs.

[pahoffm]

All 5 will probably be used through the season.

That's depth.

Should we make the finals, my guess is the top 3 or 4, on form, will be used.

Will also depend if Schulz gets drawn into the forward line, or not.

 

[Tigerblood]

At least 1 will always be injured, if not 2, so all 5 are required.

The only game I attended last year (as I live OS) was the Hawthorn one. McGuane was excellent (a lot off camera, e.g. running to block options). I agree he is totally underrated here, and in any case you always need low-budget back-ups due to salary cap. Calls to dump him are plain dumb.

The assumption Rance will be a gun - let alone 'make it' - is absurd. I remember the same being said here about Schulz in his first year. Rance hasn't even played a game yet.

Finally, Moore was one of the 3 or 4 best full backs in the AFL last year. Time he got due recognition. Thursty is his no 2 now.

 

[BBC]

I like having depth down back. Our best 3 IMO are Moore, Thursfield and Schulz. McGuane will play a lot but his kicking is limited to 30 meter passes which will always be an issue.

Rance and Post should spend most of the year at Coburg. I hope Post develops into a forward but think that his best position is CHB.

We are still short of one key forward.

 

[tigerbyte]

McGuane (or Thursty) and Raines to GC for a top 5 pick in the National Draft 2009. Surplus to needs.

With the introduction of 4 boundary umpires next year I think that the centre bounce ruckman will be predominantly play behind the ball with a dedicated ruckman/forward (Patto, Vickery) set up in the forward line. 3 set tallls + ruckman in the back half may be too many. With the ruckman consistently filling the hole in the back line we could get away with 2 tall backs only and 4 medium to small runners. Hence, we could spare a McGuane or a Thursty next year when factoring in the development of Schulz, Rance, Post, Gourdis etc.

 

[tassiedave]

McGuane was excellent this season and doesn't get the credit he deserved.Played hard, sacrificed himself and nullified many opponents. Sarge should take the oppositions 3rd best forward and on occasion play up forward to put pressure on opposing back lines.I haven't seen any other players yet that will take these 2 out of our top 25.McGuane is getting better and better.

 

[Streak]

We've been complaining about lack of KPP's for years, now we've got some depth, people want to get rid of them.

Although, if GC were to offer high draft choices, as the saying goes, "they're gawn!!!".

I think you have managed a complete circle here. From the early posts in this thread, this is the sentiment that is being expressed. No one has expressed a desire to get rid of anybody as far as I can tell, but given the apparent number of KPD on our list at the moment, I'd imagine we would be sorely tempted if a big offer for one of them came through.

 

[Streak]

I can't believe the raw deal Luke McGuane gets around here sometimes. He's been getting better every year and has the makings of a really good defender. Maybe the knock was his occasional errant disposal but this has improved considerably. It's just not an issue anymore.

Here's a guy who competes brilliantly, won't be pushed around by anyone, is mega gutsy and continually leaves his opponent to help out Kel and Thursty without getting caught out himself.

I've met him a couple of times and he's a top bloke as well. And this is what some people want to get rid of???? Unbelievable!!!!!

I don't think anyone has actually said in this thread that they want to get rid of McGuane. The point that I made earlier in this thread was that I always saw the drafting of Rance as a signal that McGuane might lose his spot in the team. From what I have heard, he is training well at the moment and last year he had a good year, so Rance will find it difficult to replace him.

Of course we wouldn't give him away. But it would be stupid to think that he wouldn't, if he keeps developing like he has, have some serious trade currency with the new Gold Coast team next year. A blooded young KPD from Queensland is a recipe for a trade well in favour of the Tigers.

 

[Tigerfan]

Okay what are we gonna do about our 5 key backs?
Rance, McGuane, Moore, Thursfield & Schulz.
We can't play them all.

We might actually be able to trade a player to another club at the end of next year

 

[shamekha]

It is a good indictment on our recruiting, don't you think, that we are now in a position that promotes such competition for positions.

B: Raines - Thursfield - Moore
HB: McMahon - McGuane - Newman

This is the back half i chose in the team to go with. We also have Bowden, Post, Rance and Shulz to fill/fight for these spots in the team. it can only be condusive to making them all improve

 

[the claw]

Okay what are we gonna do about our 5 key backs?
Rance, McGuane, Moore, Thursfield & Schulz.
We can't play them all.
Rance isn't in our best 22 yet but he will be......He'll be a gun, Schulz....I've given up hope for him as a forward,
McGuane had a good end to the season and by all reports is smashing it this pre-season.

Don't see Schulz in our long term plans unless that's as a forward.
Then there's McGuane.......I see him playing short term,But we can't play 4 key backs.

kel moore doesnt need to play as a key back. with his great pace and good foot skills he can play on the flank as a genuine medium sized player. in doing this you have three spots up for grabs,
one of these spots goes to development regardless. rance in a pocket for me. thursfield to fb hes the only fb we have.and for me schulz to chb. i put him there because of his versatility and size. he gives us an option if we need to change things around by playing moore as a flanker it also gives us options to change if need be.
the two others i would play with these four are white and tambling.

one thing our backline really does lack is genuine size to play moore mcguane and thursfield as the three talls leaves you without options if a big key forward gets hold of us. clearly one has to miss personally the battle for chb atm is between mcguane and schulz.

 

[the claw]

oh genuine tall kpds that being 190cm+ players who are capable of regularly holding down a kp on the list are;
height weight games age
thursfield 191 85 40 22
rance 192 88 0 19
mcguane 191 86 32 22

utilities. blokes who supposedly can play both forward and back and i emphasise supposedly.

polak 194 93 106 25
schulz 193 95 67 23
post 196 86 0 19

non genuine tall kpp.blokes who can regularly play kpd if required.

moore 189 86 46 25

all up thats 7 plenty of numbers. good list balance is 6 imo.polak and schulz are on thin ice mcguane has deficiencies post has been recruited as a forward rance is yet to play a senior game doesnt take much to eat into so called depth. as i have said we have finally got the structure right. it only took 5 drafts to get this basic requirement. now is the time to start upgrading players improveing the quality in each area if you like.personally i would be looking to get better versions of polak schulz and mcguane.you dont have to do them all at once we are in the position to upgrade one a yr hopefully getting something in return for each player.

 

[NZtiger]

Agree with you there Claw. The backline is certainly in a far better position than 3-4 years ago (or anytime in the last 10 years) in terms of combined potential, but you can never stop trying to improve.

 

[Tigers of Old]

All 5 will probably be used through the season.

That's depth.

Should we make the finals, my guess is the top 3 or 4, on form, will be used.

Will also depend if Schulz gets drawn into the forward line, or not.

Certainly makes a refreshing change from only a few years back where the likes of A.Kellaway & J.Bowden were playing at full back.

We now have a few options in the tall defensive posts.
I have to give Wallace a lot of credit on this one, he's developing a very solid(and young) back six.

 

[benny_furs]

Yep, McGuane is very underrated.

He did the best job on Franklin of all our defenders IMO, though Moore was just unlucky at times.




Thursfield, Moore, McGuane - Richmond's next great premiership defence.

Simple.

If Rance comes on, he'll be HBF or pocket (can swap with Moore depending on who's better defensively) and as for Schulz, well I just don't rate him as a footballer. Maybe a wing, otherwise talk that he should be picked over McGuane is laughable.

I love how we have that 'team within a team' atmosphere with our defenders, there is no reason why they can't perform to the same standard of Geelong 2007.

Now we need a key forward...

 

[the claw]

Certainly makes a refreshing change from only a few years back where the likes of A.Kellaway & J.Bowden were playing at full back.

We now have a few options in the tall defensive posts.
I have to give Wallace a lot of credit on this one, he's developing a very solid(and young) back six.

hmm credit to wallace for what? doing the minimum.
thursfield moore and schulz were all in our system before he came to the club.schulz was a forward.moore was a medium and was never supposed to play kp.he was also on the rookie list a project with no real guarantees. he recruited polak as a chf hes recruited post as a chf as well. ive been calling for kpds for so long now its not funny anymore. he didnt take one young kpd until last yr even mcguane was drafted as a forward.he ignored this area in the main even though he took mark graham in the 2004 draft in recognition of a lack of kpds.

at the end of 2003 the club ousted holland and vardy they did nothing to replace them yes hacks they were and needed to go but we had to replace them with type.
the list for 2004 included kpds of;
archibald, gaspar, hall, a kellaway, and weller, not one of them worthy of retaining and it clearly showed this area of the list was in dire straights. these 5 made up a grand total of 11 talls on our entire list. so enter terence the spin doctor in conjunction with his mate greggy miller who had already overseen two drafts.
so what do these two learned fellws do in the 04 trade/draft period..first of all two ruckmen are gone marsh and ottens leaving just an injury prone 30 yr old stafford. one dud kpd in weller is also gone.so now to the stage where we can address the problems mdae worse by recent departures.
32 yr old mark graham is taken in the nd for gods sake.simmonds is traded for at the age of 27.and a dinosaur in knobel is taken in the psd at age 25. i suppose you could argue the rucks were taken care of in the short to medium term but what about long term.
as for kpds not one was taken in the nd.some will say mcguane he was taken as a kpf.he was not specifically targeted as a defender.so wheres the long term planning. ill tell you where it is up millers and wallaces arse.

2005 the tall kpds read. archibald,gaspar, graham,hall kellaway,thursfield to the rookie list.boy oh boy we have introduced a rookie to the list to cater for the long term sheesh. blind freddie could see by now that gaspar hall and kellaway had to go because of chronic skill deficiencies and archibald was struggling.and yet we take graham a 32 yr old for 1 yr and 1 rookie,incompetence is to light a word to describe this.

2005 trade/ nd period kpds archibald and graham are gone thursfield is promoted from the rookie list. going into the nd of 2005 our kpds look like this. gaspar at 30, hall a dud, kellaway at 30, thursfield a rookie. what do we do in the nd to fix this the answer absolutely nothing.apart from promoting thursfield from the rookie list. to top it all of we trade for a soft flanker in bowden and turn down the offer of a pick in the 50s we effectively stop at pick 40 in this draft. i ask did we or did we not have needs to address.

the 2006 tall kpds read gaspar hall kellaway thursfield.thats it mcguane who will be played as a backman out of desperation imo is there but he is a forward or is considered a forward to this point. kel moore is struggling to hold his spot and was not considered a kpp and rightly so.

end of 2006 the trade /nd period goes like this. we delist kellaway and stafford goes as well. we trade for polak actually trading out of a top 10 pick and a third round selection, because while the kpds are being neglected so have the kpfs and the situation is just as dire.oh and make no mistake people polak was drafted as a forward. we take a kpf in riewoldt in the draft and rightly so as i said the kpfs have been sadly neglected as well. there are opportunities in this draft to take tall defenders but still we refuse. to top it all of we take kant kicksley in the psd what were they thinking.
one consolation mcguane was given a couple of games and showed he could become a possible tall defender.

the 2007 list reads gaspar hall mcguane and thursfield. moore is still struggling and not considered a kpp yet alone a genuine tall.

its about now 2007 that miller and terence start to get desperate if they werent already. they throw schulz back polak back continue to try mcguane back they are trying to convert forwards into backmen because as forwards they are failing and because theres not enough tall defenders on the list.when list management is mentioned in conjunction with miller and wallace tokenism should be brought up to describe the both of them.

end of 2007 the spoon is firmly in our grasp we enter the trade/nd period. what do we do . well firstly we trade pick 19 for a type we have plenty of what a joke.do we learn ever.
we then move on kingslysheesh bowden sheesh gaspar hall and knobel a few talls have gone. we take one kpd on the way to useing just 3 nd picks. at least we targeted and took a genuine kpd early in the draft but by all reports even then they ummed and ahhed, the first time its happened in over a decade. can anyone see why we have been lumbered with such deficient kpds over so many yrs.
we take gourdis a genuine forward in the psd and proclaim we will turn him into a backman. can anyone see a pattern here why cant this club target genuine backmen rather than trying to convert them after they have failed as forwards.

up to this point we have hardly paid attention to kpds in relation to the list we have hardly bothered taking any in the nd.

okay the wash up the kpds leading into 2008 were.
mcguane, rance, thursfield, and in dsperation they rookied a mature silvestor. moore was close to being cut imo he survived because he had a stong finish to the yr at coburg i still maintain he was not expected to play kp at afl level. throw in so called backmen polak and schulz did we add to this lot no some say post maybe fair enough but i dont want poor kicks coming of hb we most certinly drafted him as a forward. in wallaces entire time we have drafted just one genuine junior kpd thru the nd. terry and miller have spent most of their time plugging holes with bits of gum instead of doing the hard yards and replacing the rotting pipe with new pipe.

all this just to say i take offense we are developing some decent kpds despite wallace and his quick fixes.

 

[Dyer Disciple]

all up thats 7 plenty of numbers. good list balance is 6 imo.polak and schulz are on thin ice mcguane has deficiencies post has been recruited as a forward rance is yet to play a senior game doesnt take much to eat into so called depth. as i have said we have finally got the structure right. it only took 5 drafts to get this basic requirement. now is the time to start upgrading players improveing the quality in each area if you like.personally i would be looking to get better versions of polak schulz and mcguane.you dont have to do them all at once we are in the position to upgrade one a yr hopefully getting something in return for each player.

Good post.

 

[shamekha]

Claw i think you are full of *:-X* you go on about facts and figures that, in the game itself, they really dont mean to much at all..

Plenty of forwards get converted into backs, Rutton a premieship fullback started in the forward line..

One reason i see why this happens is that the tall forward players in the junior ranks are generally the class players with good skills as apposed to the backs that need there skills brought up to scratch.

You don't need to be over 190 to play as a key position defender.
Leo Barry (184cm) isnt even close to that height and was all australian twice. Joel Bowden all Australian CHB in 2006. AND may i mention G. Archer.
i see Kelvin Moore (189) as a Ben Hart (190cm) or Ashley McIntosh (191) type of player and i don't think 1cm will make any difference at all, as he showed last year.

Bringing an experienced 'class' backman into a side that lacked class backman to teach the young players is a good decision.


And i am pretty sure nearly every club goes through plenty of draft picks trying to get the best mix of players they can.. Players are like racehorses some go good early and fade others take time to reach their potential and others are just superstars from their first run..

I think wallace has done a good job in recognising that these players can play in defence. Post was definately recruited as a backman imo. Thats where he played his best footy last year, after starting in the forward line, he is a similar player to Polak imo, very good hands but a little better with his feet.

I would hope you could ease up on the Tigers. If not apply for a job at a footy club and see how your analysis works when its your head on the chopping block.

 

[the claw]

Claw i think you are full of *:-X* you go on about facts and figures that, in the game itself, they really dont mean to much at all..

Plenty of forwards get converted into backs, Rutton a premieship fullback started in the forward line..

One reason i see why this happens is that the tall forward players in the junior ranks are generally the class players with good skills as apposed to the backs that need there skills brought up to scratch.

You don't need to be over 190 to play as a key position defender.
Leo Barry (184cm) isnt even close to that height and was all australian twice. Joel Bowden all Australian CHB in 2006. AND may i mention G. Archer.
i see Kelvin Moore (189) as a Ben Hart (190cm) or Ashley McIntosh (191) type of player and i don't think 1cm will make any difference at all, as he showed last year.

Bringing an experienced 'class' backman into a side that lacked class backman to teach the young players is a good decision.


And i am pretty sure nearly every club goes through plenty of draft picks trying to get the best mix of players they can.. Players are like racehorses some go good early and fade others take time to reach their potential and others are just superstars from their first run..

I think wallace has done a good job in recognising that these players can play in defence. Post was definately recruited as a backman imo. Thats where he played his best footy last year, after starting in the forward line, he is a similar player to Polak imo, very good hands but a little better with his feet.

I would hope you could ease up on the Tigers. If not apply for a job at a footy club and see how your analysis works when its your head on the chopping block.

fair enough most on this site think i talk crap. you mention players like ben hart who played 90% of his career as a flanker yes adelaide converted rutten but he had a fantastic yr for west adelaide playing chb before being upgraded from their rookie list . you could argue they drafted him a defender. have a look at the kps around hart in his last few yrs. rutten as you say who was maybe converted and yes i know it happens. stevens and bassett, hart played as a flanker a lot like guy mckenna at the eagles. ash mcintosh was a monster he not only had genuine height 191 but size and strength they also had jakovich another monster. do you see anything here.

leo barry may well have been named at fb but how often did he genuinely play a lone hand on big opponents.syd style was flood back and break out he had lots of help. him and archer were certainly exceptional for their size though. barry had in 2005 the yr they won the gf a 195cm a 192 cm and a 190 cm player around him they had in backup two players at 193 cm.the leo barry as a kp is a bit of a furphy if you ask me. glen archer yeah what a player i wish we had two of him. again look at the players around him. bowden played on some big blokes intermittently because we had noone else he is not and never has been a regular kpp. we have kel moore who in all honesty is probably capable of playing kp permanently as you say at 189 hes not far of genuine height but size is a problem.all i ask is that at least one of our 3 tall defenders that we take into each game has some size about him for obvious reasons.

my gripe with the club when it comes to kpds is we have targeted just one genuine kpd thru the nd in god knows how many yrs 10 plus.
you cannot continually rely on turning failed forwards into backmen.

have a look at all teams structure while you dont have to be over 190+ to play kp its pretty much the norm. exceptions are rare to this rule.but it does happen. in fact the trend is going the other way imo and flankers are getting taller and taller.
a question would you try to convert hughes to a backman or riewoldt the answer is no they are to slow. polak and schulz two we have tried to convert are failures. our most promising defenders are exactly that defenders.

anyway enough crap for now.