Wilkes is our best short-term option for full-back

[darylcowie]

There has been a lot of soul searching on this forum for our best full-back this year.

Wilkes fits the bill if we need someone to play on gorillas.

He has a mature body, is 195cm/95kg ala Dawson and reads the play well, due to his ability to play both ends.

The major knock on him is pace, but apart from Franklin, most of the full-forwards who gave us grief last season were gorillas, not fast-leading spearheads.

Thoughts?

[Bernard Shakey]

You've never seen him play down back, have you?

[falka]

oh dear god, shoot me

[bobmurray]

There has been a lot of soul searching on this forum for our best full-back this year.

Wilkes fits the bill if we need someone to play on gorillas.

He has a mature body, is 195cm/95kg ala Dawson and reads the play well, due to his ability to play both ends.

The major knock on him is pace, but apart from Franklin, most of the full-forwards who gave us grief last season were gorillas, not fast-leading spearheads.

Thoughts?

Wilkes is crap down back..that's where Watters first tried him and he didn't have a clue...hence he finished as a forward....

i doubt the Saints Brain trust will try him there again, unless they are idiots, which could mean they post on here....

[St Ick]

Wilkes is probably the reason why we didnt get a state leage KPP in this years draft. Cant just keep topping up with GOP from state leagues. I'd say first choice is Fisher. If we lose too much from thatthen it will be Rhys or Lee I'm thinking.

[borderbarry]

I am sure the Saints brains trust have someone in mind. We will just have to wait for the practise matches to find out who.

[gringo]

Wilkes was s*** sandwich as a backman and I like him as a forward. Simpkin/ Fisher combo with Blake on Cloke, Mitch Clarke, Dawes etc.

[Dr Spaceman]

Wilkes is crap down back..that's where Watters first tried him and he didn't have a clue...hence he finished as a forward....

i doubt the Saints Brain trust will try him there again, unless they are idiots, which could mean they post on here....

I agree the Saints Brains Trust is unlikely to be thinking of using Wilkes down back. After all, his efforts there in 2012 were less than inspiring.

However I'm equally sure they will not have the same closed mind on the topic that many on here seem to have.

[SaintPav]

are you blowing glass up our arses? The glass blower would have a better chance.

[stinger]

There has been a lot of soul searching on this forum for our best full-back this year.

Wilkes fits the bill if we need someone to play on gorillas.

He has a mature body, is 195cm/95kg ala Dawson and reads the play well, due to his ability to play both ends.

The major knock on him is pace, but apart from Franklin, most of the full-forwards who gave us grief last season were gorillas, not fast-leading spearheads.

Thoughts?

Wilkes is crap down back..that's where Watters first tried him and he didn't have a clue...hence he finished as a forward....

i doubt the Saints Brain trust will try him there again, unless they are idiots, which could mean they post on here....

+1

[plugger66]

Id rather Daryl Cowie.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Beau looked about 100x better and more comfortable in the forward line than he did in the backline this year and I think the forward line is where he ought to stay. He looked good at FF and showed that he could also get ball leading up the wings and beyond, which shows he's got more than one string to his... you know what. I think Blake would be at least as effective at FB as Beau in the short term, although I don't agree that the "major knock on Wilkes is his pace". His pace for someone of his size and build looked perfectly fine to me this year, especially when on the lead or chasing someone. He might not have Fraser Gehrig pace, but few do.

When watching the replay of our game against Geelong on Foxtel last night, when Hawkins was monstering us, I came to the conclusion that there is probably only one answer to that potential problem next year, given the list we have and the fact we failed to get someone like Mitch Brown.

I don't see Stanley, for instance, being suddenly able to go one on one with the Tom Hawkins or Kurt Tippett's of the AFL, nor Tom Lee, as I've said previously, and I had previously thought that they could be effective in the pocket, Dustin Fletcher-style, going 3rd up to help and they probably would be beneficial to a degree in that role, but I just think that very well drilled forward lines with multiple good targets would be able to get good enough seperation between their targets and would still be able to get the likes of Hawkins or Tippett one out.

So when someone like Hawkins or Tippett or Cox are on a roll and starting to dominate us, which they almost certainly will, I think there is one obvious solution to this. A "+1".

We employed someone loose in defence for much of our time under Lyon and we were one of the hardest teams to score against (possibly of all time) but this year we almost never employed one and look at what happened. We had bags of goals kicked on us on a fairly regular basis and lost lots of close games that we could have otherwise won if we weren't getting dominated in that one area. On the flip side, Freo employed one or even two loose in defence for most of this year and they suddenly became very hard to score against and made the finals and smashed Geelong in the final, just a few weeks after Geelong had blown us away.

It would obviously be likely to cost us some scoring at the other end and it won't make for as attractive a brand of footy, but for those games when someone like Hawkins is dominating us and it is likely to cost us a win, I think we simply will have to put someone loose in the hole in front of him (or next to him) and back ourselves to win the game through grit and determination and back our forward line to be able to score in spite of most likely having to contend with someone loose in front of them as well. We'll just have to move the ball with patience going forward and not just blaze away without thought to where the other team have someone loose.

In all the other games we can go one on one, as we did this year, but if someone gets a hold of us at FF and looks like taking the game away from us, I think we'll simply have to put someone loose in the area if we want to win, possibly someone tall and athletic like Stanley, who would have the height, reach and leap to be a major pain in the ass for the other team.

Otherwise, I just don't see how we won't get monstered in that area again on a regular basis next year, costing us wins.

[Gershwin]

I'd certainly like to see Wilkes given another go at FB.
Apparently he is much fitter now - last season he looked badly out of condition.
He must know that FB is his if he can handle it whereas he is probably 5-6th in line for key forward.

Always prepared to give someone a second chance particularly when it would really benefit the team.

[MCG-Unit]

I'd certainly like to see Wilkes given another go at FB.
Apparently he is much fitter now - last season he looked badly out of condition.
He must know that FB is his if he can handle it whereas he is probably 5-6th in line for key forward.

Always prepared to give someone a second chance particularly when it would really benefit the team.

Yes totally agree. Some supporters base Wilke's poor showing at FB on 2 short periods of game time - both against WCE from memory - picking up Cox & Naitanui.....

[Dr Spaceman]

I'd certainly like to see Wilkes given another go at FB.
Apparently he is much fitter now - last season he looked badly out of condition.
He must know that FB is his if he can handle it whereas he is probably 5-6th in line for key forward.

Always prepared to give someone a second chance particularly when it would really benefit the team.

Thanks for your considered opinion. Far too many on here are prepared to stamp someone's papers too early.

As you say, FB may be Wilkes' best option of remaining in the AFL.

[bobmurray]

I'd certainly like to see Wilkes given another go at FB.
Apparently he is much fitter now - last season he looked badly out of condition.
He must know that FB is his if he can handle it whereas he is probably 5-6th in line for key forward.

Always prepared to give someone a second chance particularly when it would really benefit the team.

Yes totally agree. Some supporters base Wilke's poor showing at FB on 2 short periods of game time - both against WCE from memory - picking up Cox & Naitanui.....

I think it was the Saints brains trust that deemed Wilkes inadequate at full back and moved him forward, i think they gave him more than 1 game in that position...

Who knows who they are experimenting with over the pre-season for the key defensive positions....

[busso mick]

I'd certainly like to see Wilkes given another go at FB.
Apparently he is much fitter now - last season he looked badly out of condition.
He must know that FB is his if he can handle it whereas he is probably 5-6th in line for key forward.

Always prepared to give someone a second chance particularly when it would really benefit the team.

Yes totally agree. Some supporters base Wilke's poor showing at FB on 2 short periods of game time - both against WCE from memory - picking up Cox & Naitanui.....

I think it was the Saints brains trust that deemed Wilkes inadequate at full back and moved him forward, i think they gave him more than 1 game in that position...

Who knows who they are experimenting with over the pre-season for the key defensive positions....

Bob, for a man who played at both bookends for the Saints you would be eminently qualified to comment on our dilemma.

[saintsRrising]

Thoughts?

Sam Fisher is our only current player who right here and now can play as a genuine full-back.

Anyone else is a make-do or project player for the future.

[SuperDuper]

the point really is not whether Sam Fisher can play FB... It is that sometimes we need more than one player who can take big forwards.. Fisher can play any position in the backline, no doubt and can handle big players... but what happens when a team has , say Lynch and Cloke? Or Vardy and Hawkins?

[bigcarl]

Far too many on here are prepared to stamp someone's papers too early.

As you say, FB may be Wilkes' best option of remaining in the AFL.

if Lee shows himself capable of holding down ff, it may be Wilkes's only option.

[saintsRrising]

the point really is not whether Sam Fisher can play FB... It is that sometimes we need more than one player who can take big forwards.. Fisher can play any position in the backline, no doubt and can handle big players... but what happens when a team has , say Lynch and Cloke? Or Vardy and Hawkins?

Which is a different question.

Yes we need another one or two tall key defenders. We don't have other proven players, and so that means going with:
* young-uns to develop them (who are still under-weght)
* or perservering with Wilkes
* or playing Lee back rather than up forward (though up forward is where he has hit his straps)
* or playing under-sized played like Blake or Simpkin
* or giving Gilbert another go

I personally would build our defense around having Sam as the FB....or perhaps more precisely that whomever the oppositions BEST key forward is, Fisher takes them.

One good thing though is that we do have have some tallish flankers who can do a good job of support.

No team is perfect, and our lack of height (or good height) down back is shaping as one of our main deficiencies in 2013.

However a forward line of:

Milne Roo Lee/Wilkes/Sipposs/Kosi
Saad Stanley Schneider/Milera

is shaping up as one of te most lethal in the AFL in 2013.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Was watching the replay of our game against GWS on Foxtel tonight and Mick Malthouse made an interesting comment that you "don't really draft key defenders, you usually draft key forwards who end up playing in defence", or words to that effect.

[saint6709]

I agree Wilkes did look badly out of shape last year and made a great number if unforced errors ( a tennis term that fits in this case) I am hoping he can be a fitter option with cleaner hands this year - I would doubt its at full back - I want to see stanly tried there

[bobmurray]

the point really is not whether Sam Fisher can play FB... It is that sometimes we need more than one player who can take big forwards.. Fisher can play any position in the backline, no doubt and can handle big players... but what happens when a team has , say Lynch and Cloke? Or Vardy and Hawkins?

Which is a different question.

Yes we need another one or two tall key defenders. We don't have other proven players, and so that means going with:
* young-uns to develop them (who are still under-weght)
* or perservering with Wilkes
* or playing Lee back rather than up forward (though up forward is where he has hit his straps)
* or playing under-sized played like Blake or Simpkin
* or giving Gilbert another go

I personally would build our defense around having Sam as the FB....or perhaps more precisely that whomever the oppositions BEST key forward is, Fisher takes them.

One good thing though is that we do have have some tallish flankers who can do a good job of support.

No team is perfect, and our lack of height (or good height) down back is shaping as one of our main deficiencies in 2013.

However a forward line of:

Milne Roo Lee/Wilkes/Sipposs/Kosi
Saad Stanley Schneider/Milera

is shaping up as one of te most lethal in the AFL in 2013.

Not sure we can play that many players up forward and still be competetive...