Terry's got it right!

[the claw]

Bit hard to fit 21 talls into the match day side, maybe the crows will end up losing some after developing them.
Swap you a couple of scrawny runty flankers for a big hard KPP and a cheese and salami sandwich in the next trade.

wtf are you on who said they are going to play 21 talls and if you read the post i mentioned its more than likely they will trade away their excess talls for earlyish picks.

With all those key forwards I wonder why they struggle to kick more than 8 goals a game on half a dozen occassions a year.  Their key forwards aspire towards mediocre - they are good because they are well organised and because of Ricciutto Macleod Goodwin Johncock and their negating mids Mattner Shirley etc.  If we go the Adelaide way it will be snoozeville watching us play.  Prefer our way without the dinosaurs (eg Travis Gaspar) you seem to prefer.

Agree that their key backs and ruck are good though!

lynnch gaspar hansen mcdougall and smith are 5 kp forwards that spring to mind staker will develop into one and they have just promoted jamie graham of the rookie list and recruited sphanger in the last draft throw in gardiner when injuries occur and i make that 9 players who in time are going to hold down key forward posts for the weagles.the key is THEY ARE ALL AT VARIOUS STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT something that you dont seem to understand.also the eagles have always had lots of talls in their system i think at the start of next yr they will have 18 and that number is pretty much a constant with them thats almost half their list.i wonder why the eagles put such emphasis on developing tall players.
by the way imo the player they missed the most in the finals gf thru injury was lynch.forcing them to play a very underdone gaspar.like at any club time will tell with some of these players and if some dont make it they at least already have some in the system waiting for their opportunity.

 

[the claw]

Bit hard to fit 21 talls into the match day side, maybe the crows will end up losing some after developing them.
Swap you a couple of scrawny runty flankers for a big hard KPP and a cheese and salami sandwich in the next trade.

wtf are you on who said they are going to play 21 talls and if you read the post i mentioned its more than likely they will trade away their excess talls for earlyish picks.

With all those key forwards I wonder why they struggle to kick more than 8 goals a game on half a dozen occassions a year.  Their key forwards aspire towards mediocre - they are good because they are well organised and because of Ricciutto Macleod Goodwin Johncock and their negating mids Mattner Shirley etc.  If we go the Adelaide way it will be snoozeville watching us play.  Prefer our way without the dinosaurs (eg Travis Gaspar) you seem to prefer.

Agree that their key backs and ruck are good though!

I will take a boring win over a stylish loss any day.
What matters is the result, not the style.
The fallacy about KPP going the way of the Dodo is just that a fallacy.
You still need good Big Key Forwards to bust packs, take marks and open space in the forward line.
Running players tire but Key Forwards do not get any shorter.
RFC needs to recruit more KPP, this reverse idolatry about the game evolving and KPP disappearing is ludicrous.
It seems some people are willing to find a new mantra "The Game is Evolving, KPP will disappear" to cover RFC lack of class in this area.
Sound too much like Chicken Little "The sky is falling", Terry Wallace is a very good coach but he does not have a good track record when it comes to developing KPP.
The so called experts have been saying the game is evolving and will not resemble anything like it was.
The Game is very simple, you kick goals to win!
You need tall strong mobile Forwards to take marks and conversely you need tall strong mobile defenders to stop the forwards.
The only thing that has changed is the delivery between the lines of the backs and forwards.
Running players get you the ball but KPP win the game, how many times has Matthew Richardson won the game for us?

The way the team without the tall players win is they have the small skillful players who get the ball and play keepings off the other team. They get the ball to their end of the ground kick it to a small leading forward who kicks the goal!! Or any other scenario you can think of. ;D

Look, the way I see it is not that Wallace is against quality KPPs. Miller said they wanted one at 8. But Richmond has been for ages a team of slow skill poor mids (with apologies to Campbell & Knighter) trying to get the ball to quality talls (Richo, Gale, Staff, Otto, Simmo etc) who are supposed to take screamers, kick goals and win games for us. It doesn't work!!

Wallace has identified our deficit of lighter, fast skilled players. After he has fill our stocks of these he will turn his attention to other weak areas. Do you really think he is such a fool as to have not learnt any lessons from his time at the Doggies?

One more thing is we DO have numerous tall in various stages of development (remember the take a while) just not the AFL ready type you get top 10 in the draft.

given its the talls who take longer to develop dont you think hes got it arse about.also i ask have you had a look at our list of talls somehow i dont think so.

 

[Djevv]

Of the talls on our list there are three categories:

Established: Richo, Kellaway, Simmo, Knobel, Staff, Hall, Gaspar (OK a few worries here-Staff gone at end of year, Richo, Kel, Gas givwe two to three yrs))

Developing: *smile*, Thursfield, Pattison (likely to make it)

Surpise packages: McGuane, Limbach, Hughes, Moore (These guys could surpise us like thursty did last year)

14 in all. In terms of quality we have Shultz, Pattison and Hughes who have the potential to become good players. As for the rest - time will tell. But by the look of this I share your concerns to some degree. I would say we should take some talls in the rookie draft and top quality ones next year.

I disagree with TW getting it backwards though - big forwards are only as good as the smaller guys getting the ball and kicking it to them. The team had virtually NO pace or skill before TW came. We were and are desperate for it.

 

[lamb22]

Claw I'm pretty sure Lynch was fit for the GF but overlooked for Gaspar. Furthermore Hanson is overrated, Lynch, Seaby and Gaspar are hacks (sorry DUDS!!!). Gardiner has unfortunately been cruelled by injuries and has become a stegasourus.

West Coast would have won the GF if any of the three scenarios applied:

(1) their smallest player Matera was available; or
(2) their second smallest player in Braun was available (check his figures last year - one of the best three at WC); or
(3) their third smallest player in Kerr wasn't injured in the first five minutes of the granny.

Good KPPs are crucial, but lumbering grazers we can do without!

 

[the claw]

Claw I'm pretty sure Lynch was fit for the GF but overlooked for Gaspar.  Furthermore Hanson is overrated, Lynch, Seaby and Gaspar are hacks (sorry DUDS!!!).  Gardiner has unfortunately been cruelled by injuries and has become a stegasourus.

West Coast would have won the GF if any of the three scenarios applied:

(1) their smallest player Matera was available; or
(2) their second smallest player in Braun was available (check his figures last year - one of the best three at WC); or
(3) their third smallest player in Kerr wasn't injured in the first five minutes of the granny.

Good KPPs are crucial, but lumbering grazers we can do without!

lynch missed the last 2 finals because of a groin injury. little phil has had numerous games where he hasnt touched the ballit usually happens on the smaller grounds away from subi.imo the way sydney play he was more likely to be totally shut out of the game and be a liability.we can all talk about what ifs until the cows come home.kerr had a great game even with injury and i suggest you werent going to get much more out of him even if he wasnt injured.
i will concede braun has had a good yr and was probably missed but i can tell ya ive seen braun have some disastrous yrs as well.and some pretty ordinary games this yr.
as for the duds you mention as i have said gaspar has been cruelled by injury and is in reality still leraning the caper at the top level.lynch would make a great chb imo but is more than capable of playing either ff or chf.the only thing hes done wrong this yr is drop numerous chest marks but one wouldnt expect that to continue.seaby is a very raw ruckman who is probably 4 yrs away from his best. and injuries permitting i think gairdiner will show he is still one of the premier ruckmen in the league.i dont believe he should be played as a kf the only time he should go forward is to stretch sides or help out because of injury.
as for hansen i agree to a degree i think he has to start taking more contested marks but he sure is a nice hit up player.

 

[Bill James]

2005 G K M H GL T Claws Assement
Lynch 23 168 91 49 31 22 "more than capable of playing CHF or FF"
Pettifer 22 226 108 67 31 34 "dud"

Career
Gaspar 28 134 85 99 15 "cruelled by injury, and just learning the caper"
*smile* 25 86 58 52 15 "jury out"

Claw your assesment of our duds might mean something if you were objective about duds at other clubs. I can't remember Lynch having a groin, I thought he was dropped because he was struggling to get a kick in his last half dozen games. Either way the unit is a dud and will only ever be a KPP of the Bullus class. As for T Gaspar, he makes Hall and Simmonds look like stars and has done nothing despite plenty of opportunity in between injuries. Gardiner hasn't had a big game for 2 and half years is finished as a premier ruckman, he was lucky to avoid being traded.

I think your call on Seaby is correct and IMO Hansen showed more in 2005 than *smile* and Gaspar have shown in their careers and he does warrant the "just learning the caper" tag.

Lamby what game were you watching, the eagles had no trouble getting the ball inside 50 they just didn't have anybody who could catch it. Putting Kerr and Braun on the ground wouldn't have fixed that problem. As to Matera, Sydney have been one of the better sides at shutting him down.

 

[the claw]

2005          G    K     M   H  GL  T     Claws Assement
Lynch        23 168   91 49 31 22   "more than capable of playing CHF or FF"
Pettifer      22 226 108 67 31 34   "dud"

Career
Gaspar      28 134   85 99 15        "cruelled by injury, and just learning the caper"
*smile*      25   86   58 52 15        "jury out"
       
Claw your assesment of our duds might mean something if you were objective about duds at other clubs. I can't remember Lynch having a groin, I thought he was dropped because he was struggling to get a kick in his last half dozen games.  Either way the unit is a dud and will only ever be a KPP of the Bullus class.  As for T Gaspar, he makes Hall and Simmonds look like stars and has done nothing despite plenty of opportunity in between injuries. Gardiner hasn't had a big game for 2 and half years is finished as a premier ruckman, he was lucky to avoid being traded.

I think your call on Seaby is correct and IMO Hansen showed more in 2005 than *smile* and Gaspar have shown in their careers and he does warrant the "just learning the caper" tag. 

Lamby what game were you watching, the eagles had no trouble getting the ball inside 50 they just didn't have anybody who could catch it. Putting Kerr and Braun on the ground wouldn't have fixed that problem.  As to  Matera, Sydney have been one of the better sides at shutting him down.

without rehashing things just let me say i rate both gaspar and lynch way above schulz as kpp.to compare lynch to pettifer is like trying to compare the performance of a mack truck to a family sedan.and bj stats only tell a small part of a story.and to say gaspar has had plenty of opportunity well thats just plain wrong hes played 28 games in 5 yrs for no other reason than injury.judge him when hes had an injury free run for a yr or 2.