Who said that Sloane wasn't a good kick, and why bring him into it. Surely you aren't suggesting that M Crouch is at Sloane's level.
Rory is a great user of the footy both in disposal and in his decision making and if we had 3 of him we wouldn't have a problem.
In modern footy retaining possession and using the ball going forward are imperative as turnovers haven't been punished the other way at any time in the history of our game. That's why Sydney happily traded Tom Mitchell out and why WC took Sam Mitchell even though he is 117. It's also why Hawthorn have been so successful even though they don't win contested ball and why we didn't win flags even when we did have Danger in our side. We can afford one of Crouch or Thommo in the side, but we wanted Gibbs to complement them for a very good reason.
So many variables with Kicking, kane Cornes kicking effeciency was good but he would only kick it 20 metres, Dangers is far worse but he penetrates and hurts you, sloane only has a medium kick so did Sam mitchell. Nathan Buckley was the best kick Ive seen he would dob it 60 and hit a target and just go over lines. Danger has that strenght in his kick just needs to control it. Then you have players who, because of where they take the ball are under constant pressure, maybe they would be better by handballing it like A jarman who didnt have a bad kick but was more of a sloane distance.
I dont think Sloane is a great kick, he isnt a terrible one but his penetration surely lets him down. Crouch isnt any better or worse but far from a Simon Tregenza who took it on the outer and still couldnt kick, then you had Liptak who won a B and F and had mastered the helicopter punt






)
