Which team could cope with our losses?

[buck_nekkid 5,457]

If you consider our current position, which other team would be performing well without:

First pick FF (Hogan)

First pick CHF (Dawes)

First pick ruck (Jamar)

First and second picks ruck/forward (Clark, Gawn)

Equal first KP defender (garland)

That would be roughy, hale, McEvoy, Gibson + from the Hawks, for example.

How do you think other teams would go?

Do we lack depth, or is this just too much for any team to cover?

I know we are 'spineless' ATM....but this is ridiculous...

[Dwight Schrute 16,713]

If you consider our current position, which other team would be performing well without:

First pick FF (Hogan)

First pick CHF (Dawes)

First pick ruck (Jamar)

First and second picks ruck/forward (Clark, Gawn)

Equal first KP defender (garland)

That would be roughy, hale, McEvoy, Gibson + from the Hawks, for example.

How do you think other teams would go?

Do we lack depth, or is this just too much for any team to cover?

I know we are 'spineless' ATM....but this is ridiculous...

Hawthorn had, Hodge, Sewell, Mcevoy, Lake, Whitecross, Anderson, and another two out of their current best 22 and still absolutely smashed fremantle.

[TheoX 1,218]

Hawthorn had, Hodge, Sewell, Mcevoy, Lake, Whitecross, Anderson, and another two out of their current best 22 and still absolutely smashed fremantle.

Anderson, Sewell and probably WhiteX are fringe 22 players at the Hawks.

[Dwight Schrute 16,713]

Anderson, Sewell and probably WhiteX are fringe 22 players at the Hawks.

Hodge, Mcevoy and Lake certainly aren't, but i understand your point

but still feel the same sort of injuries won't worry the top teams too much as they have the structures to cope

[Gipsy Danger 1,067]

If you consider our current position, which other team would be performing well without:

First pick FF (Hogan)

First pick CHF (Dawes)

First pick ruck (Jamar)

First and second picks ruck/forward (Clark, Gawn)

Equal first KP defender (garland)

That would be roughy, hale, McEvoy, Gibson + from the Hawks, for example.

How do you think other teams would go?

Do we lack depth, or is this just too much for any team to cover?

I know we are 'spineless' ATM....but this is ridiculous...

The real problem isn't that we are missing the KPP's it the that after the first 10 preferred players on the list are picked the quality of player takes a nose dive. Great teams are judge by the quality of the 22nd picked player and we just don't have any depth past our top 10 players (when fit and available)

Edited April 8, 2014 by The Flying Hellfish

[Little Goffy 12,489]

The real problem isn't that we are missing the KPP's it the that after the first 10 preferred players on the list are picked the quality of player takes a nose dive. Great teams are judge by the quality of the 22nd picked player and we just don't have any depth past our top 10 players (when fit and available)

Ding Ding Ding!

I'm just quoting this because I agree so damn much.

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,850]

Yes that is a big list but we of lack depth.

[biggestred 4,244]

i thought you were referring to the fact that we have won [censored] all games in the last 8 years and our supporters must be congratulated for not pulling the pin as most other clubs would have (see the hawks getting 11k to a game in 05)

[KingDingAling 3,589]

Some sides could cope and remain competitive, I don't think we'll be remotely competitive against the top sides.

The gulf between the best and MFC will be embarrassing for the AFL this year.

Having Jamar, Dawes, Hogan and Garland out there would save us from big blow outs.

We might be able to pinch a few wins for the year, but that would be optimistic.

[jackaub 1,402]

Some sides could cope and remain competitive, I don't think we'll be remotely competitive against the top sides.

The gulf between the best and MFC will be embarrassing for the AFL this year.

Having Jamar, Dawes, Hogan and Garland out there would save us from big blow outs.

We might be able to pinch a few wins for the year, but that would be optimistic.

And for the next 2-3 years while we turnover 60% of the list Depth past the first 5 or 6 players is the problem along with a significant group who shouldn't be playing at this level

I would go back as far as Trengove and Grimes in that list

Edited April 8, 2014 by jackaub

[wretched.sylph 164]

That would be roughy, hale, McEvoy, Gibson + from the Hawks, for example.

Do we lack depth, or is this just too much for any team to cover?

I think this is not quite right. We have our first 3 tall forwards, our first 2 ruckmen, and our best defender missing.

That is more like Roughhead, Hale, Gunston, McEvoy, Gibson + 1 other tall.

And if Hawthorn lost that list they would be shot to pieces.

but still feel the same sort of injuries won't worry the top teams too much as they have the structures to cope

Yeah, look what happened to Fremantle's structures when they lost Fyfe and Barlow: no clearance machines > structures fail > smashed by 10 goals.

All teams are fragile. No team could cope with an entire element missing, be that outside speed, clearance players, tall defenders or forwards, or even small defenders/forwards for that matter.

So to answer the OP's question:

Do we lack depth, or is this just too much for any team to cover?

Just too much for any team to cover.

That said, we do seem to lack forward depth, something i doubt many of us had considered before these injuries.

Edited April 8, 2014 by wretched.sylph