Rating our midfield and midfield depth

[one-eyed]

Buckley askes in his Age article today to rate your own side's (Richmond's) midfielders to assess how your team will perform in the next few years.

So who would belongs in our A, B and C team midfielders? Do we have them at all?

A-team?
B-team?
C-team?

nb: 3 mids per "team"

------------------------
From ... Being benched is not a drag
Nathan Buckley | April 5, 2008 | The Age

... last year's Geelong side, which proved that the way to success in today's game is an even spread of contributions from the players who are rotated on and off the field and around the ground.

Geelong's "A" team, in my opinion, is Jimmy Bartel as the centreman, Cameron Ling as the ruck rover/defensive midfielder and Gary Ablett as the rover. (By the way, how archaic does the use of traditional position names sound now in our game?)

That leaves players of the calibre of James Kelly, Joel Corey and Paul Chapman as the "B" team and Joel Selwood, Mathew Stokes and Steve Johnson as the "C" team.

I've left out Corey Enright, who after many years in the rotations has become a solid half-back flanker who picks up midfield stats, and Max Rooke, who the Cats rate as the catalyst for their aggressive, defensive mindset.

When you break a list up like that, it's easy to understand how the Cats have been so dominant and why in this age of increased rotation they will continue to be until other teams catch up in the "B" and "C" team areas, no matter how good their best onball division might stack up.

If you want to assess how your team will perform in the next few years, try that formula on your list and see what you come to. No team in this era will succeed without the depth necessary to constantly rotate without losing either offensive or defensive intensity around the contest.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/benched-aint-a-drag/2008/04/04/1207249463489.html?page=fullpage

[Mr Magic]

Buckley askes in his Age article today to rate your own side's (Richmond's) midfielders to assess how your team will perform in the next few years.

So who would belongs in our A, B and C team midfielders? Do we have them at all?

A-team?
B-team?
C-team?

nb: 3 mids per "team"

lol well that's depressing.

[Francois Jackson]

do we have any A players?

maybe B players. foley. lids

i seriously cant think of anymore.

tuck, sugar would barely make C grade i would've thought

[mightytiges]

We have no A-grade midfielders  but ignoring that

A-team:  Foley  Tuck  Johnson
B-team: Jackson Tambling Brown
C-team:  Ummm ..... Hard one as Kingy and Lids don't play in midfield

Just shows our lack of depth. We're still waiting Cotchin, Edwards, Connors, Collins, Cass and co. to develop. Tivs, White, Hyde and Howat are fringe players.

[Judge Roughneck]

Buckley askes in his Age article today to rate your own side's (Richmond's) midfielders to assess how your team will perform in the next few years.

So who would belongs in our A, B and C team midfielders? Do we have them at all?

A-team?
B-team?
C-team?

nb: 3 mids per "team"

------------------------
From ... Being benched is not a drag
Nathan Buckley | April 5, 2008 | The Age

... last year's Geelong side, which proved that the way to success in today's game is an even spread of contributions from the players who are rotated on and off the field and around the ground.

Geelong's "A" team, in my opinion, is Jimmy Bartel as the centreman, Cameron Ling as the ruck rover/defensive midfielder and Gary Ablett as the rover. (By the way, how archaic does the use of traditional position names sound now in our game?)

That leaves players of the calibre of James Kelly, Joel Corey and Paul Chapman as the "B" team and Joel Selwood, Mathew Stokes and Steve Johnson as the "C" team.

I've left out Corey Enright, who after many years in the rotations has become a solid half-back flanker who picks up midfield stats, and Max Rooke, who the Cats rate as the catalyst for their aggressive, defensive mindset.

When you break a list up like that, it's easy to understand how the Cats have been so dominant and why in this age of increased rotation they will continue to be until other teams catch up in the "B" and "C" team areas, no matter how good their best onball division might stack up.

If you want to assess how your team will perform in the next few years, try that formula on your list and see what you come to. No team in this era will succeed without the depth necessary to constantly rotate without losing either offensive or defensive intensity around the contest.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/benched-aint-a-drag/2008/04/04/1207249463489.html?page=fullpage

Looking better

[the claw]

9 genuine mids but what about when injury or poor form hits.
its not just about a b and c teams  if yopu dont have 9 decent mids you will struggle no matter what. the real test is when 4 or 5 of those mids go down thats why i think its important we have
x amount of junior mids , x amount of developing mids, x amount of mature mids and x amount of veteran mids,  imo 16 genuine mids on your list is a minimum.
if looking for a balance in each team rather than naming your best 3 as ateam and your next best 3 as b team etc id go

a / cotchin, deledio, conca. conca is yet to establish himself though he shows promise.
b/ deledio tuck, vlastuin , vlastuin is a first yr player and shows a bit. tuckys well into veteran class at 31
c/ martin, foley, edwards. edwards has his faults and his knockers still. foley has his fitness issues.
d/ ellis, grigg, newman. grigg has plenty wrong with his game. ellis is just 2nd yr and despite good performances has a bit  to work on and newman spends more time back and has never really been a regular mid and is 31.
all 12 would be starting 22 if fit imo.

now lose just one from each group and replace em from the following list
 jackson,, arnot, lonergan, helbig,  nahas, white williams.
it shows just how much we fall away.

we still need 4 good or better mids at what ever stage of development to add real genuine depth. id go so far as to say we could do with 6 over the next yr or two  if you take the age of tuck and newman into account.

[Judge Roughneck]

Knights? Morris? Houli?

[the claw]

Knights? Morris? Houli?

let me put it this way and use another player as an example.
eddie betts is a sml forward he has in recent yrs spent decent time in the middle id still primarily classify him a sml forward despite him helping with rotations.
jake king can go into the midfield but i wouldnt call him a genuine mid. to me a genuine mid is a bloke whose primary role is as a mid i hope like hell he can perform other roles as well.
the three you mention have primary roles that do not include midfield yep they can and should all help with rotations if possible  but hey im talking blokes whose primary role is as a midfielder.

morris imo would make a great mid field tagger. but he plays in defense. houli plays of hb and has struggled imo as a mid. knights has the awareness skill etc to play as a mid and has done well there a while ago but injuries have meant hes played primarily as a forward for yrs now.  imo they are primarily flankers first who can hopefully perform a mid field role. i know it sounds like splitting hairs but its important. you need to go into game day with at least 9 genuine mids.  then you have flankers who help out. they in time may become decent mids in their own right.

heres a team of the top of my head utilising what i call the genuine mids all 9 of them.

b/ morris - chaplin - grimes. morris primary role is  as a defender.
hb mcintosh - astbury - houli/dea houli plays as a defender.  he could rotate with ellis or deledio if we need to.i wouldnt be relying on him in a midfield role.
c/ deledio - tuck - ellis. ellis and deledio can play on the flanks. mids first though and this imo is the way to go.
hf/ knights - elton - ohanlon. knights can rotate but we need him to perform as a classy medium forward first and foremost
f/ mcdonough - riewoldt - mcbean. mcdonough first and foremost to play as a quality smart sml forward who can rotate.  he may become a good mid but his primary role is as a fwd.
r maric - martin - cotchin. they can all perform other roles but they are mids first and formost.
int conca - vlastuin - edwards - foley. all mids they could be starting 18 just swap the mids around. they can perform other roles if need be.

[gerkin greg]

Knights has played more midfield than Betts has had cigarettes

[Stripes]

Here's my take - not quiet accompanied with as comprehensive of an explanation as you claw but my take none the less.

A Grade - Cotch, Lids,

B Grade - Conca, Tuck, Foley, Martin, Edwards, Houli

C Grade - Ellis, Vlaustin, Grigg, Newman, Knights,

D Grade - Jackson, White,

Cotch and Lids are our owner consistent A Grade Midfielders for mine. Conca, Tuck and Foley are work horses with Conca developing quickly. Martin is still a cameo player at the moment - able to do the amazing in spurts but not over a full game. Has the most potential to push into the A grade category.

Edwards and Houli don't spend the whole time in the middle but are quality when they are in there. Edwards is extremely creative by hand and Houli running off the wing/half back.

Ellis and Vlaustin are both capable of becoming A Graders within the next couple of years and push into the B-Grade with their performances some games already. Grigg, Newman and Knights are solid performers.

Jackson and White are playing because of their experience and strength around stoppages/pace. They will not be part of any regular finals side imo.

As I said my take but much better looking midfield than 2008 I must say!

[Judge Roughneck]

9 genuine mids but what about when injury or poor form hits.
its not just about a b and c teams  if yopu dont have 9 decent mids you will struggle no matter what. the real test is when 4 or 5 of those mids go down thats why i think its important we have
x amount of junior mids , x amount of developing mids, x amount of mature mids and x amount of veteran mids,  imo 16 genuine mids on your list is a minimum.
if looking for a balance in each team rather than naming your best 3 as ateam and your next best 3 as b team etc id go

a / cotchin, deledio, conca. conca is yet to establish himself though he shows promise.
b/ deledio tuck, vlastuin , vlastuin is a first yr player and shows a bit. tuckys well into veteran class at 31
c/ martin, foley, edwards. edwards has his faults and his knockers still. foley has his fitness issues.
d/ ellis, grigg, newman. grigg has plenty wrong with his game. ellis is just 2nd yr and despite good performances has a bit  to work on and newman spends more time back and has never really been a regular mid and is 31.
all 12 would be starting 22 if fit imo.

now lose just one from each group and replace em from the following list
 jackson,, arnot, lonergan, helbig,  nahas, white williams.
it shows just how much we fall away.

we still need 4 good or better mids at what ever stage of development to add real genuine depth. id go so far as to say we could do with 6 over the next yr or two  if you take the age of tuck and newman into account.

There is about 14 spots for non-talls. Not including the sub.

x - FB - third tall back.
x - CHB - x
x - x - x
x - CHF - x
x - FF - third tall forward
ruckman - x - x

x - x - x

x

1. Houli
2. Morris.
3. Vlastuin
4. Shane Edwards
5. Deledio
6. Conca
7. Ellis.
8. Vlastuin.
9. Martin.
10. Cotchin.
11. Foley.
12. Grigg.
13. Tuck.
14. Newman.

sub - White

*These are Richmonds top 15 in regards to non-KPP this season in number of disposals. Morris has been included as he is a defensive minded postion. White also as he seems the favored sub and has attriubtes for this.

Jackson (rubbish), Knights (knee), Pettard (rookie) and my favorite Dea ( ) have been left out.

if you start to split hairs one person is not capable of playing middle and is purely a back-man or a forward it gets complicated.

How to you fit in Jake King? It is clear Jacksons inclusion stunts the growth of others.  I doubt Helbig or Arnot will be given a chance.

A fit Knights is another (positive) spanner in the works.

I like Dea and Bachelor and would favor them in my best 22 but in reality it is hard to see where they fit in.

Pettard and Nahas are a long way back.