Ok....our real Depth..

[saintsRrising]

Well after watching Sandy play again it would seem to me that our real depth is:

King Good quality first ruckman.

Max: Delayed start to his year. But I have no doubt he will be back in our first 22 once fit and match-practiced.

Goose: Who know if he will get back to his previous form, but he is now showing that as a minimum that he would be capable.. A few more games of match practice and we may even up that rating..

Raph: Can play HB/BP

MacEvoy: Still learning and particularly in ruck skills. But should be an ok second ruck...though yes at present a definite step down from King and Gardiner

Armitage: Definitely could be playing at AFL level. still needs to improve but is ready to play if called upon.

Dempster: while injured he should be up and running and match practiced by late in the season.

L Fisher: has not really done anything wrong this year. It is just that others are playing better. Would be a steady inclusion if we had a large injury toll.

Begley: has not done much....but again if we have a horrid run he is available with mature body and 29 games under his belt.


Then there is batch of kids who look good for our future, but who are not ready yet. Someone like Steven may be worth a cameo late in the year...but with us hopefully pushing hard into the finals one would expect that year Steven would not be preferred to more experienced players like McQualter.


SUMMARY
1/ So that to me is a list of 2-4 players that could, and probably should, force their way into our best 22.

2/ 5 players that should be capable of playing quite good football, or better at AFL level

3/ At least three players in MacEvoy, L Fisher and Begley who should be handy fill in players if ever called upon.

4/ Importantly we have good spread of depth players outside our current 22 with many position covered: ruck, midfield, key backs, backs, taggers

CONCLUSION
That we are in terms of our 2009 needs very well served with depth at present.

Looking forward to 2010 and beyond there are also a range of other younger players emerging that look promising in Armitage, Steve, Lynch and Stanley. (Have to wait and see how Allen recovers).

[Goose is king]

I think that there are at least ten guys who could play well as the 22nd man in this Saints side.

They just need to play a role well enough and any deficiencies will not come through as we keep winning.

[saint66au]

Better strike L Fisher from that list for a while

[Cairnsman]

I don't want to sound negative but depth is like a lot of things in AFL clubs, it is subject to perception. During the early stages of the 2007 season I recall an article in a WA paper about the Eagles depth. The eagles were flying and they had a 'Harlem Globe Trotters' feel about them.

Exit Judd and Cousins and they hit rock bottom. Where was their depth. I mean this was a team that won the 2006 flag. I know it was Judd and Cousins but was the rest of their list that bad.

Would we still be the team we are now if Dal and Monty exited. Could Armo and Eddy pick up the slack.

[Quixote]

How long is Fish gone for? Perfect depth player, he is.

Fish and X Clarke in the last two weeks is not great really.

[Legendary]

Still, better to be losing guys out of the 22 than guys in it.


Backline depth: Hudghton, Begley, R. Clarke, Maguire, Miles, Gwilt (shift position)
Midfield depth: Armitage, Steven, Begley
Forwardline depth: Lynch, R. Clarke, Maguire (shift position), McEvoy
Ruch depth: McEvoy, Stanley


So we have plenty of depth in our backline, but are a bit short through the middle, especially with X and Leigh Fisher going down in the last couple of weeks.

Really important we keep our midfield fit and injury free.

[meher baba]

Gee you are amazing toysRus!!

I watched Sandy yesterday as well, but I learnt absolutely nothing about King, Max and Dempster.

What's your secret..............

[vacuous space]

I watched Sandy yesterday as well, but I learnt absolutely nothing about King, Max and Dempster.

They're not exactly unknown quantities.

[meher baba]

I watched Sandy yesterday as well, but I learnt absolutely nothing about King, Max and Dempster.

They're not exactly unknown quantities.

I know, it's just that I'm finding that toysRus's endless pontificating is getting my goat a little bit.

But, to be fair, at least this was a new thread rather than a bump of one he started in 1896................

[plugger66]

Every side has depth when you are winning. It may sound negative but I would suggesy our depth may be poor. Who would know. All I know is the Sandy side in the last few weeks has been poor.

[saint66au]

I know, it's just that I'm finding that toysRus's endless pontificating is getting my goat a little bit.

Have you the slighest idea how puerile, childish and silly you (and others I grant you) look when mocking other peoples nicknames??

Its kindergarten sandpit stuff and, in my eyes anyway, considerably devalues anything else you have to say, no matter how mature and well thought-out it is

[vacuous space]

It may sound negative but I would suggesy our depth may be poor.

Poor in relation to what? Nobody has ready made replacements for their stars running around in the twos. We've got a bunch of players who could come in and play a role without destroying us. I'd be just fine with Clarke or McEvoy coming in tomorrow night. I'd also be fine with Armo or Begley playing. Goose made the VFL look beneath him yesterday. Heyne, Lynch and Steven are all very capable young players. We also have a bunch of AFL-capable players who are injured right now. I would suggest our depth is as good as anyone's.

[saintsRrising]

Gee you are amazing toysRus!!

I watched Sandy yesterday as well, but I learnt absolutely nothing about King, Max and Dempster.

What's your secret..............

Quite simple..my comments are based on the whole season....with the final point of reference being as stated in the OP as having been made after the Sandy game.


The point is that this locates playes such as King as presently being OUTSIDE of the 22. King for example next week may well be back in the 22.....and so if I wrote the OP then, and I said that after watching the Essendon game then KING may well not be in the Depth list as he would be in the 22.

Perhaps you can follow now??


Oh and on nicknames......Do you still call Lyon Barney? You know the nickname you gave him when you were howling for him to be sacked.

[Dis Believer]

Any updates on Leigh Fisher's condition?

[saintsRrising]

Any updates on Leigh Fisher's condition?

The latest I heard was that it was deep laceration requiring plastic surgery.

Apparently there are no breaks or fractures though.

[stinger]

Any updates on Leigh Fisher's condition?

The latest I heard was that it was deep laceration requiring plastic surgery.

Apparently there are no breaks or fractures though.

that's what was said in this morning's paper.......

[saintsRrising]

But, to be fair, at least this was a new thread rather than a bump of one he started in 1896................

Maybe you should bump up your recent call for Schneider to be dropped?

[Saintschampions08]

I don't want to sound negative but depth is like a lot of things in AFL clubs, it is subject to perception. During the early stages of the 2007 season I recall an article in a WA paper about the Eagles depth. The eagles were flying and they had a 'Harlem Globe Trotters' feel about them.

Exit Judd and Cousins and they hit rock bottom. Where was their depth. I mean this was a team that won the 2006 flag. I know it was Judd and Cousins but was the rest of their list that bad.

Would we still be the team we are now if Dal and Monty exited. Could Armo and Eddy pick up the slack.

Dal and Monty are both in our top 6 players, but the problem is the type of game they play. We'd be pretty screwed if we lost them.

Depth isn't about being able to cover your top 5 players, their our core players. Every team in every sport in the world has a core group, and then the rest of the list. Depth is about covering the rest of your list.

[InkerSaint]

I don't want to sound negative but depth is like a lot of things in AFL clubs, it is subject to perception. During the early stages of the 2007 season I recall an article in a WA paper about the Eagles depth. The eagles were flying and they had a 'Harlem Globe Trotters' feel about them.

Exit Judd and Cousins and they hit rock bottom. Where was their depth. I mean this was a team that won the 2006 flag. I know it was Judd and Cousins but was the rest of their list that bad.

Would we still be the team we are now if Dal and Monty exited. Could Armo and Eddy pick up the slack.

Dal and Monty are both in our top 6 players, but the problem is the type of game they play. We'd be pretty screwed if we lost them.

Depth isn't about being able to cover your top 5 players, their our core players. Every team in every sport in the world has a core group, and then the rest of the list. Depth is about covering the rest of your list.

AND... West Coast's troubles weren't just about the fact that they lost 2 of their best midfielders... Judd was still in the team when they were spiralling down from their early-season lead. Benny's misdemeanors were calling the club's culture into question and they went from a well-oiled machine to a rabble in a matter of weeks.

[borderbarry]

From what I have seen of Stanley, he could overtake McEvoy in the near future. He is very mobile.

[meher baba]

But, to be fair, at least this was a new thread rather than a bump of one he started in 1896................

Maybe you should bump up your recent call for Schneider to be dropped?

I stand by what I have said about Schneider. I think he has a fair bit of talent but has low productivity: because he has a poor work ethic and/or a chronic injury problem which prevents him from giving more than about 70%. Like the Swans, I would consider a trade of both him and a hard-working GOP for a second round draft pick to be a reasonable deal.

That said, now that X is out for the season, I can't see anyone playing for the Zebras who - given our current onfield structure - is likely to challenge Schneider for his spot. So, if he continues to produce what he did against the Dogs, he is now highly likely to play 25 games this season.

However, I do note that the club named him for both the AFL lineup and the Zebras a couple of weeks ago and therefore must have toying with the idea of sending him back there for a week or two.

[bergholt]

Begley: has not done much....but again if we have a horrid run he is available with mature body and 29 games under his belt.

i'm sure you've seen more sandy games than i have, but what do we really know about begley at afl level? i personally can't remember ever seeing him in a game for brisbane, though that might be just because i wasn't paying attention to their back pocket. and i certainly haven't seen him in the best for sandy yet.

sandy vfl best votes this year:

biddlecombe: 16
maguire: 9
gallagher: 7
paterakis: 7
fisher, l: 6
summers: 4
armitage: 3
crowe: 3
howard: 3

we've had very good luck with recycled players, but usually they're dumped/traded for a reason. it wouldn't surprise hugely if begley was the next tony delaney rather than the next sean dempster.

so yes, while he's definitely a depth player, let's not be counting on him too much.

[meher baba]

I know, it's just that I'm finding that toysRus's endless pontificating is getting my goat a little bit.

Have you the slighest idea how puerile, childish and silly you (and others I grant you) look when mocking other peoples nicknames??

Its kindergarten sandpit stuff and, in my eyes anyway, considerably devalues anything else you have to say, no matter how mature and well thought-out it is

Well, you are one of the moderators, so ban me if you don't like it.

However, it would be the height of hypocrisy to do so while posters like Teflon continue to be tolerated. I haven't noticed you having a go at him like you just did with me.

That said, it probably isn't fair of me to have a go at saintsRrising as he is mostly one of the more gentlemanly posters on here.

However, sRr, enough with the online self-congratulation already!! Even if you were completely right about everything re GT, Lyon, etc. (and I still reckon you have a growing case to answer in terms of your past harping on about how our list was "ruined"), it is totally ungracious to trumpet on about how "I was right, you were wrong, told you so, etc.".

We must expect a bitter and twisted (and, I suspect, frequently intoxicated) poster such as Teflon to go on like this, but you should be able to do a bit better.

[meher baba]

While we are on the subject of depth, I have a couple of serious comments to make.

A lot of our apparent depth at the moment arises from the fact that we have 6-7 players in our top team who have, until fairly recently, been considered to be of questionable value at AFL level: Dawson, Ray, Gwilt, McQualter, Jones and, to some extent, Gardi, Eddy and Geary.

These players are effectively keeping out proven AFL performers such as Raph, X (until injured), Armo, Leigh Fisher and, when they come back from injury, possibly King, Max and Dempster. And we also have Begley at the club, who is likely to perform ok if needed.

If you look at this list, you realise that our depth is pretty good down back: Raph, Max, Dempster, Begley, Leigh Fisher and Miles (who the coach seems to rate).

But I really think our midfield and forward setups are still pretty fragile. With season-ending injury to just one player - Ball - the midfield lost a lot of its grunt towards the end of 2008. The advent of Ray and the continuing improvement of McQualter and Geary have probably helped to some extent, but we are still vulnerable.

As for our vulnerability up forward, I hardly need to comment: I reckon we are light on even with Kosi, Riewoldt, Milne and Schneider all fit.
The loss of Allen for the season took away our one developing backup. Despite what some posters on here think, you can't depend on players like Lynch or Heyne to deliver in their first year: if they do, it's a bonus.

Goose is perhaps a longshot to be developed into a forward a la Gehrig. Short of a horrendous injury run, there is no longer a vacant spot for him down back. He is big and strong, has a great leap, and is pretty quick (albeit not able to change direction too easily) I reckon he's a much better prospect up front than Gilbert, Raph or Gwilt. I would hope that Ross might give him a go as a forward at AFL level some time this season.

[saint vince]

Goose is perhaps a longshot to be developed into a forward a la Gehrig. Short of a horrendous injury run, there is no longer a vacant spot for him down back. He is big and strong, has a great leap, and is pretty quick (albeit not able to change direction too easily) I reckon he's a much better prospect up front than Gilbert, Raph or Gwilt. I would hope that Ross might give him a go as a forward at AFL level some time this season.

If you watched the 2nd half of the Sandy game he looked like he had been playing up forward all his life. Looked really good.