Came across this over at bigfooty.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.p...77#post15514477

Very interesting statistic.

Add Garland to our list of emerging defenders and in all seriousness it will be elite in two or three years.

The only issue remains as to whether or not Garland, Rivers, Warnock and Frawley will be able to increase their posession rate.

Can Garland and Rivers become our Sam Fisher and Sam Gilbert???

Thanks for that, neita. The development of our backline has been one of the few bright spots of the past 18 months for Melbourne. Our regular defenders don't get belted one on one too often. Hopefully the midfield and forwardline can uphold their parts of the bargain soon, and we'll see the total points against column continue to plummet.

Unfortunately, we'd be only one of a few teams to defend our wooden spoon. Having one of the best defences in the worst team isn't much to write home about

Can Garland and Rivers become our Sam Fisher and Sam Gilbert???

Rivers can't he can't carry the ball for starters.

Unfortunately, we'd be only one of a few teams to defend our wooden spoon. Having one of the best defences in the worst team isn't much to write home about

My thoughts too.

My thoughts too.

yeah..not apples and apples.. in the history of the game its only fairly recent times theres been any advantage to being onthe bootm.. at all previous junctures in footy you WOULD get off the bootom at any costs.. Now theres a prize. Ya gotta see it for what it is.

What this says more about is the ability to hurt the scoreboard oursleves..not the ability to defend..... two very differing things.

Our defence will be better for Garland returning and the maturing of other young kids coming through..It bodes well.

While I believe our back 6 is looking very good for the future, this isnt a stat that speaks too higly of our defence.

Plus a teams ability to restrict the oppositions scoring is nowdays far more than the quality of your back 6 you put out on the field. Its the full 18 now.

If StKilda scores our season average against this week, we will end with 2274 against for the year. Heres' how that stacks up since 1970.

1970 -12th/12

1971 - 10th/12

1972 - 10th/12

1973 - 10th/12

1974 - 10th/12

1975 - 11th/12

1976 - 9th/12

1977 - 8th/12

1978 - 6th/12

1979 - 7th/12

1980 - 8th/12

1981 - 9th/12

1982 - 5th/12

1983 - 8th/12

1984 - 8th/12

1985 - 7th/12

1986 - 8th/12

1987 - 6th/14

1988 - 11th/14

1989 - 12th/14

1990 - 9th/14

1991 - 10th/15

1992 - 8th/15

1993 - 11th/15* (ave. over 20 games)

1994 - 13th/15

1995 - 14th/16

1996 - 14th/16

1997 - 16th/16

1998 - 15th/16

1999 -13th/16

2000 - 9th/16

2001 - 11th/16

2002 - 16th/16

2003 - 14th/16

2004 - 14th/16

2005 - 12th/16

2006 - 15th/16

2007 - 12th/16

2008 - 12th/16

2009 - 14th/16*

It stacks up well against teams in the late 70s, through the 80s into the early 90s because the game was far more attacking then. Teams simply kicked bigger scores.

It compares ok with teams in the last decade, but it is still towards the poorer end of the ladder.

We're on our way, but we still have much work to do.

I think it is a really interesting statistic. We have spent most of the last 6 games "experimenting" and playing with 6-10 2nd players due to injury. If the backs can hold up this well with such a deal then how will they look with a fit and firing team in 2011? Not something to hang the hat on, sure, but I think it is nice to know that the light at the end of the tunnel isn't an on coming train.

Prob is I can see the saints scoring 130+ this week

Can Garland and Rivers become our Sam Fisher and Sam Gilbert???

I see Frawley as our Sam Fisher. They have many similarities in their style of play. Frawley has the potential to be an All-Australian at some stage down the track, in my opinion. As for our Sam Gilbert, none of the others. Grimes is that guy for the next year when he's playing in defence. Longer-term, not sure at the moment.