skeptic wrote: ↑Tue 30 May 2023 3:34pm
Vortex wrote: ↑Tue 30 May 2023 1:49pm
skeptic wrote: ↑Mon 29 May 2023 10:14pm
8-12 role players Vortex!!!!
I want to say that’s nuts but in fairness I don’t understand where you’re coming from.
Can you name 10 or so of the players you call role players in our squad so I can get a sense of how you’re defining them.
I use the quality of performance you see in the final 2 weeks of the finals, that's the only measure isn't it when thinking about players cable of helping us win some silverware.
I haven't got time to name the 10 right now but I will do it tonight or when I'm next at my desk and I'll rattle off two lists, one of players who I think might be capable of GF quality and a lost of those I just can't see being capable of standing up in the final two weeks of the finals series.
In the meantime I'd genuinely be interested in your 2 lists.
Appreciate that. I don’t really measure lists in that way. I think most lists including premiership teams will have players on the day that wouldn’t be in the top 22 of other teams.
Every list has its starts, quality or essential contributors, good ordinary players, role players and those that they’re developing into or trying to develop into those categories.
IMO there’s not many in the role category on this list. Whether or not they are good enough to be in the top 22 as the players they are is another question but I guess we’re just discussing separate things.
My sense that you’re more talking about the hat you perceive as players good enough to be on the list.
It's how ALL coaches at the elite measure players. And when you think about it, it's fairly obvious that is the only way to measure a players worth if you are in the business of winning silverware.
It is generally accepted that the definition of a "role" player is a player who isn't blessed with certain talents and as such it's widely accepted that a flag team can only carry about 4-6 "role" players.
Presently our list is way off the GF pace, one poster recently highlighted perfectly my point above by arguing we aren't too far off the pace because of how close the margin was against the Pies, this claim absolutely hammers home my point about using the correct measurement, it's pointless measuring up against Collingwood in April, we need a test against a top four side in September, preferably when it matters, and that is the final 2 weeks of September. That's the litmus test, and we are so far off the pace in finding a team that can get us to that testing point. And then when you get your opportunity at that first litmus test, (a preliminary final), all you have done is gained the opportunity to test yourself at the second last hurdle. AND how many middle-of-the-ladder teams have failed constantly at that second last hurdle, North being the last best example.
And I am absolutely certain the point I'm making is something Lyon isn't kidding himself about, as I have said repeatedly, I believe he sold a mandate to Bassett to turn over the list drastically within his first 4 years as he's not kidding himself about this list. And I think the performance against the Hawks would have really validated that for Lyon, we were monstered physically by a team competing for this years wooden spoon. Doesn't sound like a list capable of standing up in the closing minutes of a GF does it?
T74 recently summed up our predicament and massive challenge ahead, and it's the point I've been making since Lyon was appointed, you can have a brilliant coach but the coach is nothing without the players. This list will look totally different towards the end of Lyons contract.
