THE TOP SIX

[Hannabal 4]

I touched on the importance of a club’s top 6 in another thread and thought that it would be a worthwhile exercise to evaluate the whole competition’s top 6.

For those that didn’t read the post in another thread let me expand. A few years ago Craig Cameron effectively denounced the widely held belief that “a team is only as good as the bottom 6 of its best 22”. He argued and conclusively proved to me that a team is only as good as it ‘best 6’. He pointed out that if one analyzed the end of year ladders over recent seasons there was a strong correlation between the ‘H&A’ ladder at round 22 and the quality of a club’s top 6 players. In most cases the ladder at year’s end mirrors the quality of the team’s top 6 players. Naturally, it won’t be absolute due to vagaries such as injury, but the pattern is undeniable. And it’s not to say that the bottom 6 isn’t important to a team’s flag chances, as we know that all great sides have good depth, but it’s the stars that determine how well a team can be built and how deep it will go into September. Carlton is a prime example that ‘no depth = average team’, plus I reckon their top 6 is currently overrated, despite Judd at the helm, as their young are still a couple of years away.

I’ve long held the belief that stars win flags and that our dearth of genuine top shelf stars has precluded us from ultimate glory even when we were regular finals contenders. Whilst our very best players since the AFL officially came into being in 1990 delivered sustained periods of success and many Finals appearances they fell short of being the games elite. More importantly, we haven’t had the champion midfielders that are almost always required to ensure a premiership. This gets back to the quality required in a team’s ‘top 6’.

It’s no coincidence that Connolly and Prenderghast have both earmarked in a recent article that it is players that have the ability to become “stars” that we would be targeting in the upcoming draft. It’s our lack of quality in our ‘top 6’ that more than anything else sees us languishing at the bottom of the ladder.

I’ve listed the players I believe to be the top 6 of all clubs below. It’s always a little subjective, but it won’t be far off. The players aren’t named in any particular order and I’ve included a couple of line-ball players of each team in brackets.

Would Geelong’s second ‘best 6’ be stronger than our ‘top 6’ ?

The clubs are in alphabetical order:

Adelaide - Thompson/Edwards/Goodwin/McLeod/Rutten/Bock (Vince/Porplyzia)

Brisbane - Brown/Black/Power/Adcock/Bradshaw/Drummond (Clark/Brennan)

Carlton - Judd/Fevola/Waite/Murphy/Gibbs/Simpson (Stevens/Thornton)

Coll - Swan/Didak/Davis/Pendlebury/Fraser/Lockyer (Cloke/Presti)

Essendon - Watson/McVeigh/Stanton/Lovett/Lloyd/Fletcher (Ryder/Winderlich)

Fremantle - Pavlich/Sandi/Duffield/Hasleby/Mundy/Schammer (McPharlin/Palmer)

Geelong - Ablett/Chapman/Bartel/Selwood/Johnson/Scarlett (Corey/Ottens/Ling)

Hawthorn - Hodge/Franklin/Roughead/Sewell/Mitchell/Rioli (Lewis/Bateman)

Melbourne - Green/Davey/Sylvia/Bruce/McLean/Moloney

North - Harvey/McIntosh/Simpson/Wells/Rawlings/Petrie (Swallow/Firrito)

Port - Cornes/Cornes/Burgoyne/Cassisi/Boak/Tredrea (Chaplin/Salopek)

Richmond - Richardson/Bowden/Deledio/Foley/Tuck/Tambling (Cousins/Jackson)

St. Kilda - Riewoldt/Hayes/Goddard/Dal Santo/Montagna/Koschitzke (Ball/Gilbert)

Sydney - Goodes/Kirk/O’Keefe/J. Bolton/McVeigh/Jolly (C. Bolton/Shaw)

W/Coast - Cox/Kerr/Priddis/Embley/Lynch/Selwood (Wirrpanda/Stenglein)

Bulldogs - Cooney/Cross/Lake/Murphy/Boyd/Higgins (Johnson/Giansiracusa)

Some of those 'top 6' are ageing, some in their prime, some still on the j-curve, and some all three.

As at the end of round 14 the AFL ladder is as follows:

Saints

Cats

Dogs

Pies

Crows

Lions

Blues

Bombers

--------

Power

Swans

Hawks

Eagles

Roos

Tigers

Dockers

Dees

Other than Hawthorn, would there be much change to a ladder of ‘top 6’ quality ? Hawthorn are the odd ones out due to the vagaries of injury, a late preseason, players having operations too late last year, being the hunted, etc, but overall Cameron was right. If you asses the quality of all club’s ‘top 6’ players you’ll find that it won’t be far off mirroring the league ladder.

It’s another reason why a PP is a must at year’s end. Scully just isn’t enough. We need quality and then some. With Grimes, Watts, Morton, Garland, etc, the talent is coming through, but it can’t come quickly enough. And much more is needed.

This is my order of the teams ‘top 6’ ladder:

Cats/Saints

Hawks

Pies/Dogs

Lions/Crows/Port

Swans/Blues/Bombers

The rest

How far off the current ladder ?

So when supporters try and predict our rise up the ladder keep in mind how far behind we’re coming from. For example, when our ‘top 6’ is finally ‘Watts, Scully, Grimes, Garland, Morton, and Blease’ then we’ll be well on our way to sustained success. It’s some time away, as most realize. And yes, there are 40 players on a list and it’s not just about your best players but building a great team through quality depth. The point remains though; it’s stars that win flags. Just look at the ladder.

NB: Melbourne was just about the hardest ‘top 6’ to assess. I can understand why supporters that aren’t overly enamoured with Moloney, Bruce, or McLean would say “they’re not in our top 6”, but their present value to the team suggests otherwise. But before supporters lose the point and start saying “what about Rivers, or player X”, just remember we’re crud for a reason and have little top end quality at all. So by all means insert the player you feel should be in our top 6 as it won’t change our position one iota on the ladder of ‘top 6 best’.

[Slartibartfast 15,872]

Nice work Hannabal. I too was one that was educated by Craig Cameron in this regard. I remember trumpeting our depth and thinking that set us up for a tilt at the flag. It was when we had Neitz, White, Yze, Johnstone, Davey, Bruce and Green as our leaders. They were fair average quality "top 6" (I know I've named 7) but fell short of elite and we probably did well to achieve what we did. CAC set me straight.

The club was well aware of this and try as we might we never produced an elite player in the Daniher/Cameron era. I think we are much better placed now with an abundance of early picks that CAC never had. But as you rightly point out it will take time because our "top 6" now is really not worthy of that designation.

[titan_uranus 22,562]

I believe the top 6 and bottom 6 are equally as important. Having a star top 6 is well and good, but Carlton shows that if your bottom 6 are duds, then you won't go far. Similarly, we showed in the 2004-2006 period that, though we didn't tail off as you read down the list, we didn't have enough star quality at the top to ensure we won a premiership.

Geelong and St Kilda are successful at the moment becuase their bottom 6s are strong (and, of course, they have brilliant top 6s).

[Redleg 37,891]

There is a lot of merit in the top six argument. Though as all agree depth is still a strong factor, but we have all seen the champions drag teams across the line for a win countless times.

I can see us challenging as a finals team when our best six are Grimes, Morton, Garland, Watts, Blease and ( Scully ) and then the next six possibly McLean, Sylvia, Bennell, Jurrah, Spencer and ( Trengove ).

[Hannabal 4]

Carlton don't have a "star top 6" yet though. Murphy is a good young player, but still turns the ball over with his disposal; Gibbs doesn't win his own footy yet, or hurt the opposition on the scoreboard; Simpson is a good player but no star; Waite is obviously injured and Fevola plays on his own terms. I said in my OP that Carlton's top 6 is presently overrated and you're falling into the same trap. I believe that their current position on the ladder pretty accurately reflects the rating of their top 6.

Also, stars make others around them far better players. We'd all be able to give examples where a seemingly very good player has gone to a struggling club and pretty quickly been found out to be no better than average; Heffernan and Blumfield immediately come to mind, but there'd be stacks more. The point being, if you assemble elite top end quality the ripple effect through the team is palpable. In other words depth becomes a by-product of an elite group of top players.

Finally, it just doesn't make sense that the bottom 6 of a team's 22 can possibly effect outcomes of a match equal to the stars in the team.

Just keep looking at the ladder from year to year. The evidence doesn't lie.

[Akum 2,660]

Beautiful work Hannabal! The best part is your setting out of the implications of all this to us. Totally agree with your future top 6 - I'd like to sneak Strauss in there but he's got even further to go. Maybe Grimes' BOG last week was a crossing of the Rubicon in a way? But your point about being a long way off is emphasised by the fact that 3 or 4 out of your future top 6 aren't even in the team this week.

How about putting it this way - a good "bottom 6" is necessary but not sufficient for the ultimate, and the only sufficient factor is the "top 6"?

I notice also that with some clubs (unmistakeably Cats & Saints, perhaps Dogs, but not Hawks) your "top 6" slides fairly smoothly into your "top 8" - in other words, your numbers 7 & 8 in brackets are much closer to numbers 5 & 6. These clubs will have extra depth to cover for injuries, loss of form etc in their "top 6".

[baileybyebye 0]

brilliant work,thought provoking and a little beyond me.top 6 v bottom 6,offense v defense,champion team v team of champions,the best player in draft v best player for your mix.

you throw up the top 6 , name the bottom 6 of each team.we will then have more empirical data either way.does the bottom 6 lift the upper 6 and conversely.

blake caracella was almost elite at essendon though struggled at a successful brisbane( i dont know what that means,i think thats my point)

.i think the unfortunate trend that the most recent success mix becomes a recipe for success ,i dont think there is one .luck ,luck,luck.

luck with injuries(No knee reco's for Schwartz ,premiership/s for melbourne)

luck with draft(hope teams miss selwood and you pick him up at 7,you pick up roughhead before buddy,should have blown your chance , hindsight should have got you but he was still there and you win a premiership cause the opposition did not kick straight)

luck with everything,just ask adelaide of the nineties.im gunna b drunk before iget there seeya

[jacey 333]

Give Melbourne Geelong's top 6 and we would be premiership favourites. Combine Geelong's next best 16 with Melbourne's best 6 and we would be struggling to make the 8.

Stars win premierships. They not only win games of their own boots, they make everyone stand taller. They take pressure off the B grade players and with less pressure, they too will also help win games.

We need genuine undisputed top 20 players in AFL.

[baileybyebye 0]

I believe the top 6 and bottom 6 are equally as important. Having a star top 6 is well and good, but Carlton shows that if your bottom 6 are duds, then you won't go far. Similarly, we showed in the 2004-2006 period that, though we didn't tail off as you read down the list, we didn't have enough star quality at the top to ensure we won a premiership.

Geelong and St Kilda are successful at the moment becuase their bottom 6s are strong (and, of course, they have brilliant top 6s).

I re read the post ,great point.short but rising to the ribcage.

[george_on_the_outer 7,015]

The Toiyges really have never done a rebuild. They have continually traded away draft picks to recruit hope, and at the same time keep their rabid supporters pacified.

This year it was Cousins. Previous years Brown, McMahon, Kingsley, Johnson, Simmonds, Polak.....How would Callan Ward be in their side today instead of Jordan McMahon?

They finish 9th perpetually BECAUSE their supporters don't allow bottoming out. They will never make the finals, leave alone a premiership while this feral relationship persists.

The whole thing which does keep US awake is that when the club finally gets the chance to select some really good talent with a top draft pick, then we all hope that it is the right selection.

We hope that our top players will be Scully, Watts, Morton, Blease, (Trengove-Butcher-Morabito..), Strauss....because they were the picks when we had, have the chance. We won't know the answer for some time yet.

To doubly shaft themselves , the draft for Richmond is littered with the likes of Tambling, Lounder, Banik,Oakley-Nichols.

So not only do you have to get good draft picks by bottoming out.

You have to be lucky that there is good quality there when you do ( ala last year, but not this year beyond the first 3 or 4...).

But finally you have to pick the good ones when they are available....Roughead and Franklin instead of Delidio and Tambling.

[Guest Watts=Saviour]

Geelongs performance tonight shows what happens when you take 6 of the best out of a quality side.

[45HG 1,539]

Was about to say the same thing, though Bartel, Selwood and Chapman played.

Edited July 11, 2009 by 45hotgod

[H_T 2,941]

I agree with CAC's theory on the 1st 6 best players reflecting the position on the ladder more or less. With respect to Carlton their stars are still young. What keeps me - not necessarily awake at night - but every waking hour thinking about what picks we'll get and if those picks will become stars of the future. Watts,Morton,Blease, Garland,Scully?,Grimes,...at the moment these names are our hope for best 6 and right now they are far from it.

Other names I hope can make stars are Frawley, Jurrah & Martin.

Edited July 12, 2009 by High Tower

[Hannabal 4]

Geelongs performance tonight shows what happens when you take 6 of the best out of a quality side.

Exactly right. Geelong were reduced to almost Melbourne's level without Ablett, Scarlett, Johnson and the borderline top 6 in Ottens and Ling.

And how competitive were Freo without their two best players in Pavlich and Sandilands ?

[Roost It 1,434]

Yes.

That's a ripping thread. Aside from the "top 6" aspect of your post, I've had this stuff on my mind all year. I've been thinking all season, but moreso in the last month, that we are in a bit more trouble than I think many realise.

It actually kind of keeps me up at nights.

Watts, Grimes, Blease, Jurrah, Frawley, Garland, Morton, Scully, Strauss, Garland, Bennell, Maric, Petterd,Pick 2/3 2009. We need 6 of these guys to step up. The ones in bold are seemingly the most likely, 2 of them play for us, the other should be playing for us next year. Our second pick this year should be elite but we don't know who he is, let alone if he will be elite. I have high hopes for the others on this list and think we will be a good side in a few years, will we be good enough, well that will depend on our top 6.

Do you think beating Port will help you sleep Dappa?

Edited July 12, 2009 by Roost It

[Akum 2,660]

Watts, Grimes, Blease, Jurrah, Frawley, Garland, Morton, Scully, Strauss, Garland, Bennell, Maric, Petterd,Pick 2/3 2009. We need 6 of these guys to step up. The ones in bold are seemingly the most likely, 2 of them play for us, the other should be playing for us next year. Our second pick this year should be elite but we don't know who he is, let alone if he will be elite. I have high hopes for the others on this list and think we will be a good side in a few years, will we be good enough, well that will depend on our top 6.

Do you think beating Port will help you sleep Dappa?

RI, I think you've nailed it. There are several possibilities from whom our "top 6" could come in 3-5 years time.

Except that you left out Davey, Sylvia, Jamar (who should all still be with us in 2014 and beyond), Wona, Martin, Jetta, Meesen, Spencer, Buckley, Cheney, McKenzie.

As it stands, this makes 25 around the club who at least have the potential to be "top 6", or even "top 8" or "top 10" elite for any club. All these have immense upside (other than Davey & Sylvia who are near there already). At this stage it is impossible to tell who might do what it takes to step up. Think of Matthew Boyd of the Dogs. Agree that the ones you've picked are the most likely, but we've given ourselves every chance of getting the sort of team improvement we need.

And this is my point. Scully and "pick 2/3" are numbers 24 & 25 on this list - at the head of the queue perhaps, but not the only options. The club's really given us every chance to get 6 or more players into the elite category in future.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

I'm uncertain as to why I would have rose coloured glasses ?

Yeah, I may have overstated. I just think I'm a bit less positive than you on the futures of some of our guys. Live in hope and all that, but the games of Rich, Hill... even Vickery etc etc make me envious to say the least. And yes I know Rich has a mature body blah blah... but still.

I think I just want to see some food on my plate, H. Nothing more. Ricky and Liam make a nice midnight snack though, don't they?

The young players I list as possibles are just that, possibles. But if they fail to become elite then we're doomed for at least 15 years due to the two new teams; and that's far from an exaggeration.

It's a fact. Geelong has stars everywhere, we need 6 minimum, that will make the other 16 (plus half-a-dozen rotations) look like a premiership side. And don't forget we need a fair bit of luck too, what with the non-Collingwood draw we'd be getting.

That said, I feel that you're falling into the trap of judging young talent way too soon.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I don't think it's outrageous to be assessing players on what you see in their first, second or third seasons. Judd was going all guns blazing in his second season. Plus, I'm not marking on output, more on abilities, skillsets... eg. Morton worries me a little bit with his lack of physicality, Blease stresses me out with his size and the fact I reckon he might be an outsider exclusively. That sort of thing. Grimes may be the closest thing we have to a young player that has all the ingredients. Don't get me wrong H, I've rarely written a player off, if ever. I'm certainly not doing that with any of our guys under 23 or so, besides maybe Newton. What we're talking about isn't whether or not they'll make it, but whether or not they'll be among your "top 6ers." I can't stand the thought that some of these guys are going to be our next Wheatleys.

In his first 100 games of footy - yes, that's 100, Ablett averaged 15 possessions per game and rarely ventured into the midfield due to his less than impressive 'engine'. He's averaged 30 possessions per game since. No-one quite knew what was coming even though he'd been in the system for 5 years - except perhaps his teammates and coaches.

That would be a stat wouldn't it? For the record, and I realise it's convenient for me to say this, but I couldn't understand even then why people didn't call him a star. I thought he was a gun, and even when he was patchy early in his career, he still played starring games off a HF flank. Your point is well made, but like I said, I thought once he hit his mid-twenties he was a monty to be a star. Other than Grimes and maybe Watts, no-one on our list makes me feel the same way.

How quick we are to predict the future and how quickly we forget the past.

What gets me is that we are basing our recruiting wants on previous years successes. Going for good kicks because of the Hawks, hoping for an Ablett type because the Cats are the best going around. What will we be looking for if the Saints win? A second big forward?... ND got himself in a lot of trouble by copying what the premiership team of the year before did, being reactionary. It was a good way to get us to the middle. What I would REALLY like to see is innovation. If not that, then players of genuine unbeatable class that make innovation redundant. Watts really is the great white hope.

Letting go of the past may make all the difference between a very, very good side and a great one.

I think it can keep us all up at nights Dappa.

However, must disagree about the Toiyges.

Yeah, not a bad post. They have netted a fair bit of youth along the way though. Cotchin, Deledio. I can't for the life of me see why Deledio has turned out to be anything less than the next Judd, I thought he was incredible in his youth. Maybe Richmond happened to him?

Watts,Morton,Blease, Garland,Scully?,Grimes,...at the moment these names are our hope for best 6 and right now they are far from it.

Exactly. But I think only Morton out of that lot deserves any criticism at all. They're all still young as H has said, and I can't disagree with that. I'm not Freak.

Other names I hope can make stars are Frawley, Jurrah & Martin.

I still have reservations about Martin, but I think Frawley will end up being the next Whelan in terms of being underrated.

Do you think beating Port will help you sleep Dappa?

I haven't slept in 30 hours. I think I'm a hummingbird of some kind...

(full credit to whoever can name that reference)

[gomelb 0]

sack dean bailey

get gary lyon so he can stop getting rid of our good players. we r not 4 to 6 years away so thats why mclean left cause bailey thinks they need more time but i think there ready now. y get rid of robbo he might come in handy in the finals cause he was r leading goal kicker and he only played half of the year. and he is younger than mcdonald. GO DEES 2010

[twist 0]

sack dean bailey

get gary lyon so he can stop getting rid of our good players. we r not 4 to 6 years away so thats why mclean left cause bailey thinks they need more time but i think there ready now. y get rid of robbo he might come in handy in the finals cause he was r leading goal kicker and he only played half of the year. and he is younger than mcdonald. GO DEES 2010

School holidays?

[QueenC 74]

School holidays?

Apparently, but it's worth having this thread up the top again because it is a great read........

[Rogue 585]

we r not 4 to 6 years away so thats why mclean left cause bailey thinks they need more time but i think there ready now.

You've got to be kidding.

So, you watched the Saints v Geelong grand final and thought 'pfft, Melbourne could have won this match...if we still had Robbo'?

Wow.

[QueenC 74]

You've got to be kidding.

So, you watched the Saints v Geelong grand final and thought 'pfft, Melbourne could have won this match...if we still had Robbo'?

Wow.

Yeah it's the way he used to chase and tackle, a skill which wasn't important at all in the GF, that would have made him so vital !!!

[rpfc 27,570]

I can't stand the way these nuff-nuffs put 'Go Dees 2010' as if to assuage the barrage they expect for posting such tripe.

Won't work.

You are clueless gomelb.

And D'Land really should have a sign on the front page that says 'Warning: School Holidays.'

Thankfully, they will be at school during trade week...

Edited September 30, 2009 by rpfc

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Apparently, but it's worth having this thread up the top again because it is a great read........

Was just thinking that.

Actually, this thread popped into my head around the time the Brock news broke. I remember wondering if H had him in his all-famous top 6, which he did.

I think that says something at least about the quality of what we just lost.

[beelzebub 22,244]

Apparently, but it's worth having this thread up the top again because it is a great read........

certainly is...even if we have to put up with the odd nong !! :D

We can all sit here and ponder what wil be of next year but I suggest revisit this idea at the end of season 2010 might be very enlightening.. Of course it will be say some..but we will know more about the likes of Scully and Trengove in the big league, how has Watts kicked on...has Jurrah been voted undescribable player of the century ? and you can see where this goes. In essence where and by how much has Melbourne morphed from might be's to 'are' ?

How well the best 6 emerge will indeed tell us our timetable