The attached table is an indication on where our depth does or does not lie. You can argue various players position but it shows up a few of the recent recruiting decisions.

Namely the need to recruit Cross and Vince, a developing young ruck in King, a small fwd in JKH and the reason for the upgrade of Clisby. You could maybe see the non-selection of a developing Tall defender in the recent draft as a mistake.

As a side note next year’s top 10 draft picks at this stage is full of quality KPP and with another likely top 10 pick another KPP would seem more than likely.

MFC.pdf

Interesting table.

It would be even more interesting to compare with other more successful lists.

And one glaring feature, a real indictment on the last decade of recruiting, development etc is the fact that there are only 5 of "our own" who have over 100 games behind them. Considering the number of high draft picks we have had since 2001, that is an appalling figure.

Really like what you have done here.

Michie was recruited as an inside clearance player wasn't he? This would only highlight your point more in regards to what ROOS targeted!

Depressing that 29 of our list are yet to play 50 games. With 19 of that number yet to play a seasons worth of AFL footy...

A way to go.

You can argue various players position but it shows up a few of the recent recruiting decisions

Nice format - but classifying the players correctly is the whole point of a depth chart isn't it?

Is Grimes a mid?

Are Salem, Harmes and Michie outside mids?

Is Kent a mid?

Is Watts a forward?

Are Jetta and Tapscott small forwards?

If Garland's a key back how come Pedersen isn't?

Are Hunt and Nicholson backs?

Nice format - but classifying the players correctly is the whole point of a depth chart isn't it?

Is Grimes a mid?

Are Salem, Harmes and Michie outside mids?

Is Kent a mid?

Is Watts a forward?

Are Jetta and Tapscott small forwards?

If Garland's a key back how come Pedersen isn't?

Are Hunt and Nicholson backs?

Yes it is but players can be classed into more than one group ( some none ) and for the purpose of the exercise ive only placed them once.

Grimes played mostly mid last season

Salem, Harmes Michie - Inside/Outside??

Watts has played fwd mostly so far

Jetta ,Tapscott Nicho prob fall into the none position

Hunt I put back as that's where he played for BGS last season.

Yes it is but players can be classed into more than one group ( some none ) and for the purpose of the exercise ive only placed them once.

Grimes played mostly mid last season

Salem, Harmes Michie - Inside/Outside??

Watts has played fwd mostly so far

Jetta ,Tapscott Nicho prob fall into the none position

Hunt I put back as that's where he played for BGS last season.

I would suggest that Michie should be in the same category as Tyson - both a similar age and a more mature body size (so i would place as inside), whereas Salem and Harmes being first year players and smaller would classify for outside roles if they played a game in their first seasons.. as they get bigger and better they may then swap into an inside mid role.

Good job all round

Simple numbers don't tell the story. You have to look at the quality in each area as well.

For example you question the need to draft JKH because we have an ageing Byrnes along with Jetta and Tapscott to play as small forwards. There is a very real possibility that none of those 3 will be on our list next year. As for Cross and Vince, do you seriously believe our midfield didn't need to be addressed? Without Cross and Vince we have 4 mids who have played more than 50 games, one of them will return to the back line, one can't kick and one hasn't fired a shot for two years. As for the small and medium backs, Dunn is the absolute standout as far as on field results go out of that group, enough said.

The next draft is stacked with talls at the pointy end and there's only so many holes you can fill in one draft.

The list highlights two glaring realities.

1. We have wasted so many high draft picks, or we have not developed them. So many of our players have played less than 40 games and we still really don't know if they can or can't play strong, consistent footy at the top level (Strauss, Tappy, Blease etc...)

2. We are in prime position A to improve. The amount of 22 - 26 year olds on that list is very strong. But it remains potential. I am so sick of potential.

Suggested changes:

Creation of forward/ruck position with Clark, Fitzpatrick and King

Move Grimes to small or medium defender

Move Pedersen to tall defender

Move Garland to medium defender

Move Strauss and Terlich to small defender

Move Jetta to small defender

Consider creating versatile midfielder for Vince, Trengove, Michie, Salem and maybe even Evans

Move Watts to outside mid

In terms of age and games played it shows me we can actually get some immediate impact from guys still yet to play 100 games (Howe, Watts, Dawes, Clark, Grimes, Trengove, McKenzie). And if we can win games whilst Hogan, Kent, Viney, Toumpas, Tyson and Michie to name a few still haven't got to 50 games then we will be a better side again once they do. Our best 22's wont be the youngest sides ever picked and we probably be older the when we were rebuilding from scratch in 2008-2009 under Bailey but it still lacks a lot of experience.

OK DA - I will take the bait.

WTF?????

OK DA - I will take the bait.

WTF?????

I would suggest that's a puddle ie. very little depth.

The counter to that would be that we have 3 decent key forwards and a nice forward/ruck in Fitzy, 3 options for 1st ruck all of whom can at least provide something, options with tall defenders and small defenders. But when it comes to the midfield I'll take a puddles depth in 2014 compared to not even enough to fill an entire team in 2013.

You notice that the picture of the puddle is roughly the same as the shape of A map of Australia!

Simple numbers don't tell the story. You have to look at the quality in each area as well.

For example you question the need to draft JKH because we have an ageing Byrnes along with Jetta and Tapscott to play as small forwards. There is a very real possibility that none of those 3 will be on our list next year. As for Cross and Vince, do you seriously believe our midfield didn't need to be addressed? Without Cross and Vince we have 4 mids who have played more than 50 games, one of them will return to the back line, one can't kick and one hasn't fired a shot for two years. As for the small and medium backs, Dunn is the absolute standout as far as on field results go out of that group, enough said.

The next draft is stacked with talls at the pointy end and there's only so many holes you can fill in one draft.

You either miss read my OP or I didnt make it very clear but I was pointing out that Cross Vince and JHK where good decisions and not questioning them at all. Infact JHK was the one I had picked out for our 2nd pick if Jarman Impey was already gone and was rapt we took him.

OK DA - I will take the bait.

WTF?????

Muddy puddle? Murky waters?

Yes it was a lame attempt to visualise our little depth.

It does look a map of Australia.

Stay tuned next week when I post a map of Tassie.

I thought it was a representation of the depth of analysis in this thread.

I think you exaggerated a bit.