We had 8 debutantes - are you really suggesting that that had no impact on our performances? In reality, the team doesn't settle, we lose continuity, and our more experienced players have to work harder. None of our debutantes, with the exception of Stewart, were top 4 team standard, IMO.
How many games did those debutants play? How many did they play together?
O'Connor played 2 games, Cunico played 1 game, Simpson played 4, Buzza played 6, Guthrie 9. Hardly an overwhelming amount of gametime put into those players. In Zuthrie's case, he was given a spot in the side over a more experienced player in Thurlow, so that was a path the match committee opted to take rather than one they were forced to.
You claim Geelong was smashed by injuries. It's true that we were playing kids who had no place in a top 4 side, and that was damaging, but that's not because Geelong had any kind of unusually high injury toll. Geelong was not the victim of any greater player loss than any other top side. The difference, however, is that Geelong lacks depth. That is why Geelong had to play these kids and contend with the outcomes.
Geelong used 36 players in 2017
GWS used 37
Richmond used 38
If the problem was instability caused by so many players being rotated through the side, how do you explain Richmond's success, keeping in mind 7 of Geelong's 36 played 5 games or less? The injury toll and number of players being rotated were nothing unusual. I would say that Geelong's injury run the last couple of years has been reasonably ideal - Dangerfield and Selwood have played nearly every game, Hawkins has only missed due to suspension, the KPDs have almost always been available, Duncan has played nearly every game. It's when key players start going down that you'll see what it's like to face an injury crisis. At this point, no one should be surprised that McCarthy, Cockatoo or Gregson is going down injured.