At the halfway point in the year, attention starts to turn to what we’ve seen so far, and how the season will shake out at the end of the year. Last week HPN looked at how the teams were looking so far, so this week attention naturally turns to the players.
Specifically, who is setting the pace on field, and who should be in the minds of All-Australian selectors at the end of the year?
The Watch List
Instead of just providing a hypothetical team (that’s at the bottom, if you want to skip down), HPN will also look at lists of players to watch at each loose positional group.
To determine where a player sits within each group, HPN is using Player Approximate Value (PAV) to work out where across the ground he has contributed the most value – which gives us three broad groups (forwards, mids and defenders). From there, we’ve done a quick classification of those who play taller or smaller up forward, those who are more active in KPD like statistics or are creative out of defence (or a blend of the two), and inside v outside mids. Of course, ruckmen have also been split out.
That leaves the following groups
- KPD
- Rebounding Def
- General Def
- Inside Mid
- Outside Mid
- KPF
- General Fwd
- Ruck
To create the watch list, HPN has taken the top 10 for all these groups (and top 15 for inside midfielders), with any player inside the top 20 to at least match the mPAV of the 10th best player in their group also added. This is done to take consideration of players who have missed a couple of games so far, but would be on track to be inside the group if they played a full slate.
By far the deepest group here is the inside midfield group. Of the likely AA 40 at the end of the season, 10-15 inside mids may be chosen, compared with perhaps 4 KPFs and 3 rucks. As a result, HPN felt it fair to extend the list for this highly competitive and important group.
Some players were manually reclassified where the model produced a result that was clearly wrong, but any edge cases were left with what the model came up with.
Defenders
KPD
The linchpin of most defences are the KPDs, or Key Position Defenders for long. This group is diverse in nature, and might be one of the most hotly contested at the end of the season.
McGovern, Jeremy WC 11 1.09 12.16 0.94 14.18 -0.761 1.674 -0.794 0.04 1 12 2 33 Taylor, Harry GE 11 2.42 9.83 1.69 13.95 -0.467 1.162 -0.627 0.023 2 3 13 7 Moore, Darcy CW 9 0.44 11.84 1.24 13.52 -0.881 2.184 -0.667 0.212 3 32 3 19 Howard, Dougal PA 9 2.08 9.67 1.64 13.39 -0.441 1.601 -0.56 0.2 4 4 16 8 Talia, Daniel AD 11 0.05 12.5 0.67 13.21 -0.989 1.749 -0.854 -0.031 5 61 1 46 Pittard, Jasper NM 11 1.19 10.21 1.57 12.97 -0.738 1.246 -0.655 -0.049 6 10 11 10 Hamling, Joel FR 11 0.39 11.57 0.83 12.8 -0.913 1.546 -0.818 -0.062 7 36 4 39 Keath, Alex AD 11 0.87 10.5 1.32 12.69 -0.808 1.31 -0.71 -0.069 8 17 8 18 Weitering, Jacob CA 11 0.24 11.35 1.09 12.68 -0.948 1.496 -0.759 -0.07 9 45 5 30 Blicavs, Mark GE 11 0.22 11.31 1.1 12.63 -0.952 1.488 -0.758 -0.074 10 48 6 29 Andrews, Harris BL 9 0.65 10.22 1.2 12.07 -0.825 1.748 -0.676 0.082 11 25 10 22 Davis, Phil GW 9 1.08 9.61 1.18 11.87 -0.71 1.585 -0.683 0.064 14 13 18 23
Harry Taylor sits at number two for overall PAV here, but in reality he has largely played as a swingman. If a mid-season AA team had to be chosen, Moore or Talia would likely leapfrog him. Andrews and Davis both sit outside the top 10 here, but if they get clean bills of health on the way home, they will make the race very competitive.
General Def
Fitting in between those defenders who take the primary KPFs (although they sometimes get the task) and those who create attack from defence are what we call General Defenders.
Ryan, Luke FR 11 1.23 12.24 2.57 16.05 -0.729 1.694 -0.434 0.177 1 21 3 14 Rampe, Dane SY 11 0.77 13.36 1.62 15.76 -0.83 1.94 -0.644 0.156 2 30 1 26 Crisp, Jack CW 11 2.56 6.58 6.4 15.54 -0.437 0.447 0.409 0.139 3 4 20 1 Hardwick, Blake HW 11 1.63 11.31 2.44 15.38 -0.641 1.489 -0.463 0.128 4 14 4 15 Houston, Dan PA 11 1.81 8.98 4.55 15.35 -0.601 0.975 0.002 0.125 5 13 7 2 Howe, Jeremy CW 11 0.69 13.28 1.12 15.09 -0.848 1.922 -0.754 0.107 6 38 2 37 Vlastuin, Nick RI 10 1.3 8.47 3.1 12.87 -0.685 1.05 -0.25 0.039 7 19 8 7 Saad, Adam ES 11 0.73 9.61 2.22 12.56 -0.84 1.114 -0.511 -0.079 8 35 6 18 Clark, Jordan GE 10 4.24 5.31 2.9 12.45 0.027 0.284 -0.299 0.004 9 1 28 8 Hooker, Cale ES 8 0.47 10.81 0.68 11.96 -0.859 2.27 -0.793 0.206 10 45 5 45
Luke Ryan has been a lynchpin for a stellar Fremantle backline so far this year, continuing to rise up the leaguewide ranks for defenders.
Rebounding Def
Rebounding defenders are an odd beast. Most are smaller, but occasionally a bigger body is used to float away from non-dangerous KPFs and to attack from intercept marks. These players have low spoil numbers generally, and very high rebound 50 rates.
Stewart, Tom GE 11 1.38 16.43 2.14 19.96 -0.697 2.616 -0.528 0.463 1 30 1 26 Smith, Brodie AD 11 3.86 11.05 4.24 19.15 -0.152 1.431 -0.067 0.404 2 3 9 4 Sicily, James HW 11 1.37 16.11 1.55 19.03 -0.699 2.544 -0.66 0.395 3 31 2 37 Rich, Daniel BL 11 2.65 10.47 4.46 17.58 -0.418 1.304 -0.018 0.289 4 12 11 2 Wilson, Nathan FR 11 1.72 12.82 2.6 17.14 -0.621 1.819 -0.427 0.257 5 22 4 20 Lloyd, Jake SY 11 2.56 11.83 1.76 16.15 -0.436 1.603 -0.613 0.184 6 13 6 32 Hurley, Michael ES 11 0.16 15.08 0.7 15.93 -0.966 2.317 -0.845 0.169 7 57 3 54 Hurn, Shannon WC 11 1.01 12.82 1.42 15.26 -0.777 1.82 -0.687 0.119 8 39 4 40 Laird, Rory AD 11 2.72 9.07 3.37 15.16 -0.401 0.995 -0.258 0.112 9 11 16 11 Macmillan, Jamie NM 11 1.52 11.41 2.1 15.03 -0.666 1.51 -0.537 0.102 10 26 7 28
Stewart, Smith, Sicily and Rich are as diverse a top four in any position group that you are likely to find. However, their ability to create from defence is the one thing they have in common. The top three all are heavy favourites to be in the final AA 40 at the business end of the year.
Forwards
General Fwd
The general forwards usually play smaller than the KPFs, and often run through the midfield. Other than those two broad traits, how they play often differs. Some play really high up the ground, others are used out of the square in the 6-6-6 set up and to drag an important defender away from play. Others run endless hit-up leads, while a select few specialise in the art of the crumb.
Walters, Michael FR 11 10.35 3.01 8.62 21.98 1.276 -0.337 0.897 0.612 1 8 6 1 Duncan, Mitch GE 11 7.77 6.87 4.54 19.18 0.709 0.511 -0.001 0.406 2 25 1 13 Ablett, Gary GE 10 11.41 1.12 5.76 18.29 1.761 -0.729 0.393 0.475 3 2 49 5 Ziebell, Jack NM 11 8.39 1.84 7.39 17.62 0.847 -0.596 0.625 0.292 4 19 23 2 Heeney, Isaac SY 11 9.31 2.15 5.52 16.99 1.049 -0.527 0.215 0.246 5 14 14 6 Breust, Luke HW 11 11.43 1.45 4.01 16.88 1.514 -0.681 -0.118 0.238 6 1 35 22 Himmelberg, Harry GW 11 10.95 2.95 2.98 16.87 1.409 -0.351 -0.345 0.237 7 4 8 51 Papley, Tom SY 11 10.07 2.58 3.95 16.6 1.216 -0.432 -0.131 0.218 8 10 11 25 Gunston, Jack HW 11 10.25 2.96 3.25 16.47 1.256 -0.349 -0.284 0.208 9 9 7 39 de Goey, Jordan CW 9 11.02 0.59 4.83 16.45 1.964 -0.84 0.3 0.475 10 3 92 10 Cripps, Jamie WC 9 8.23 1.94 3.46 13.63 1.212 -0.478 -0.068 0.222 18 22 18 32 Melksham, Jake ME 8 6.48 1.1 5.83 13.41 0.959 -0.667 0.763 0.352 20 31 53 3
Walters has a very large lead in this group, over a pair of hybrid mid-forwards from Geelong. Walters is having a career year, and has exceeded any reasonable expectations for his play. Jordan de Goey, if he played a full slate of games, would slot into second spot here, and he may be there by the end of the year.
KPF
This group needs no introduction – you know who they are.
Cameron, Jeremy GW 11 18.39 1.2 3.04 22.63 3.046 -0.735 -0.332 0.66 1 1 20 3 Finlayson, Jeremy GW 11 13.1 3.99 2.85 19.95 1.883 -0.121 -0.372 0.463 2 5 1 7 Hawkins, Tom GE 11 16.26 0.86 2.77 19.88 2.577 -0.811 -0.391 0.458 3 2 29 9 Brown, Ben NM 11 14.55 1.02 2.71 18.28 2.202 -0.776 -0.405 0.34 4 3 26 11 Darling, Jack WC 11 13.16 1.65 2.29 17.1 1.895 -0.637 -0.496 0.254 5 4 9 19 Mihocek, Brody CW 11 10.19 1.24 4.48 15.91 1.241 -0.726 -0.014 0.167 6 9 17 1 Allen, Oscar WC 11 9.17 3.36 2.75 15.27 1.016 -0.262 -0.395 0.12 7 13 4 10 Reid, Sam SY 11 9.94 2.63 2.65 15.22 1.186 -0.422 -0.417 0.116 8 11 6 13 Wright, Peter GC 11 8.37 3.58 2.83 14.78 0.841 -0.211 -0.378 0.084 9 15 3 8 Rohan, Gary GE 11 10.93 1.13 2.57 14.62 1.404 -0.752 -0.435 0.072 10 7 22 14 Kennedy, Josh WC 10 12.74 0.41 1.26 14.42 2.084 -0.9 -0.695 0.163 11 6 40 39 Lynch, Tom AD 10 7.97 1.41 4.09 13.46 0.928 -0.66 -0.011 0.086 14 19 13 2
The GWS pair of Cameron and Finlayson have been very impressive so far this year, continuing the trend of Cameron (and the GWS midfield) being able turn his second and third forwards into stars for at least a short period of time. It is highly unlikely that Finlayson keeps this up, and even more unlikely that the AA selectors would opt for two Giants in the final squad. Some of Finlayson’s value has come from his work in defence, where his raking boot propels GWS upfield.
As always, Josh Kennedy looms as the dark horse here – his value almost exclusively comes from attack, and he rarely strays from his most valuable area.
Midfield
Inside Mid
You can perhaps nitpick and argue about the quality of talent in some of the groups above, and argue if they are really All Australian level talents. Not here. This is the cream of the crop.
Kelly, Tim GE 11 8.71 3.7 13 25.41 0.916 -0.185 1.859 0.863 1 2 21 3 Bontempelli, Marcus WB 11 7.94 3.75 12.39 24.08 0.746 -0.175 1.727 0.766 2 4 18 9 Shuey, Luke WC 11 6.8 5.34 11.65 23.78 0.495 0.175 1.562 0.744 3 8 7 10 Dangerfield, Patrick GE 10 9 2.82 10.84 22.65 1.177 -0.319 1.623 0.827 4 1 44 16 Pendlebury, Scott CW 11 5.81 3.61 13.17 22.59 0.278 -0.206 1.897 0.656 5 13 22 2 Sloane, Rory AD 11 5.96 5.55 11.04 22.55 0.312 0.22 1.428 0.653 6 10 5 15 Mundy, David FR 11 4.43 5.37 12.66 22.46 -0.024 0.181 1.785 0.647 7 44 6 6 Fyfe, Nat FR 10 5.86 2.99 13 21.85 0.419 -0.278 2.146 0.762 8 12 39 3 Boak, Travis PA 11 5.54 2.48 13.51 21.53 0.219 -0.454 1.972 0.579 9 14 52 1 Sheed, Dom WC 11 7.93 3.74 9.51 21.19 0.744 -0.177 1.093 0.554 10 5 19 30 Coniglio, Stephen GW 10 8.63 2.06 9.96 20.65 1.088 -0.501 1.41 0.666 11 3 65 25 Merrett, Zach ES 11 4.87 5.93 9.82 20.61 0.071 0.305 1.159 0.512 12 30 1 26 Prestia, Dion RI 11 4.91 3.14 12.44 20.5 0.081 -0.309 1.737 0.503 13 29 37 8 Yeo, Elliot WC 11 5.13 4.93 10.44 20.49 0.128 0.084 1.296 0.502 14 22 8 20 Neale, Lachie BL 11 4.6 3.19 12.47 20.26 0.011 -0.298 1.744 0.486 15 40 34 7 Crouch, Brad AD 11 6.17 3.8 9.82 19.79 0.357 -0.165 1.161 0.451 16 9 15 26 Oliver, Clayton ME 11 2.96 3.74 12.98 19.68 -0.348 -0.177 1.856 0.443 17 68 19 5 Hopper, Jacob GW 11 5.07 3.3 11.31 19.68 0.115 -0.274 1.488 0.443 17 23 33 14 Shiel, Dylan ES 10 5.49 3.76 10.27 19.52 0.328 -0.09 1.486 0.575 19 16 17 22 Taranto, Tim GW 11 5.5 3.52 10.19 19.2 0.21 -0.226 1.241 0.408 20 15 24 23
You can make really good arguments for all 20 here, and maybe some that were left off. Lachie Neale, who is favourite for the Brownlow, is probably on the outside looking in. You could even make a strong argument for Tim Taranto in 20th – the third listed GWS player.
Outside Mid
Some people call these players link men, or wingers, or second layer stoppage players. Some of this group fit into one or more of the broad mini-roles of those above, others are even harder to define. These guys don’t really win a lot of clearances, but they are more used to get the ball inside 50.
Zorko, Dayne BL 11 8.59 2.65 12.18 23.43 0.89 -0.417 1.68 0.718 1 1 20 1 Robinson, Mitch BL 11 7.39 4.15 7.9 19.45 0.627 -0.087 0.738 0.426 2 2 12 4 McCluggage, Hugh BL 11 7.29 3.46 8.23 18.99 0.605 -0.238 0.811 0.392 3 3 15 3 Henderson, Ricky HW 11 6.27 4.89 6.92 18.08 0.378 0.076 0.522 0.326 4 4 7 5 Whitfield, Lachie GW 9 5.88 5.43 5.93 17.25 0.581 0.461 0.595 0.546 5 5 2 12 Hill, Bradley FR 11 5.27 4.36 6.52 16.15 0.16 -0.041 0.434 0.184 6 7 10 7 Atkins, Rory AD 11 4.47 5.79 5.86 16.12 -0.016 0.273 0.29 0.182 7 16 1 13 Newnes, Jack SK 11 4.27 5.31 6.28 15.86 -0.061 0.168 0.382 0.163 8 17 3 10 Powell-Pepper, Sam PA 11 4.82 2.21 8.75 15.78 0.061 -0.515 0.925 0.157 9 13 22 2 Sidebottom, Steele CW 11 3.99 5.02 6.64 15.65 -0.123 0.105 0.461 0.148 10 20 5 6 Berry, Jarrod BL 9 5.45 2.99 5.57 14 0.464 -0.197 0.497 0.255 15 6 18 17
And here come the Lions. The top three here are all from Brisbane, and it is hard to argue with any of them being in the conversation. Lachie Whitfield would be leading this group if fit, but he is set for another run on the sidelines, which should be enough to dash his hopes of end of year selection.
Ruck
Rating the influence of rucks is a hard thing, especially considering their expanding role in modern footy. HPN is currently looking if we place too much importance on the value of rucks (and the balance of all positions), but it’s hard to argue the importance of the top few here.
Gawn, Max ME 11 7.8 3.48 12.91 24.19 0.716 -0.235 1.841 0.774 1 6 7 2 Grundy, Brodie CW 11 8.02 2.37 13.32 23.72 0.765 -0.478 1.931 0.739 2 5 12 1 Lobb, Rory FR 11 8.49 5.31 7.38 21.17 0.867 0.167 0.624 0.553 3 3 1 11 Goldstein, Todd NM 11 8.61 2.6 8.78 19.99 0.894 -0.428 0.931 0.466 4 2 11 4 Witts, Jarrod GC 11 8.73 1.65 8.41 18.79 0.92 -0.637 0.851 0.378 5 1 18 6 Ryder, Paddy PA 11 8.27 2.83 7.59 18.69 0.82 -0.378 0.67 0.371 6 4 8 8 Bellchambers, Tom ES 11 7.19 3.64 7.54 18.36 0.581 -0.2 0.659 0.347 7 9 4 9 Stanley, Rhys GE 9 6.76 3.63 7.94 18.34 0.819 -0.024 1.135 0.643 8 10 5 7 Martin, Stefan BL 11 7.46 2.12 8.76 18.33 0.64 -0.534 0.927 0.344 9 7 15 5 Marshall, Rowan SK 9 6.48 2.05 8.88 17.41 0.743 -0.449 1.387 0.56 10 12 17 3
Like last year, this is a battle in two. It will be Gawn or Grundy, and it probably should only be one. Lobb has been great around the ground for Freo, while Goldstein continues to defy time.
The Mid Year HPN AA Team
So – a lot of names, a lot of positional groups. How does it all fit?
Like this:
Maybe the backline is a little tall, and perhaps there should be a little more diversity on the bench. For HPN, this pretty fairly represents how a team could line up, and the players named could adequately cover every spot on the ground.
All apologies for those left out.