Strategy Let's Talk About Depth, Baby

Remove this Banner Ad

Grape Bear

Grape Bear

Norm Smith Medallist
Veteran
Sep 12, 2012
7,529
10,145
Middle of Nowhere
AFL Club
Fremantle
Hi, guys! I was already thinking of starting this thread last week, after someone asked about our depth on the main board, and now with injuries to key players in our back line and our first loss, it seemed a good time to hypothesize about how we are going to manage our list in the lead up to the second half of the season.

People have theorized that to have a reasonable shot of winning the flag, a team should ideally have 28-30 players who are AFL/Finals ready that can slot into roles in the event of unexpected injury and suspension. I think we've played about 26 players this year (I've been lazy, I haven't looked up the number, so please feel free to correct me), and it's probably more important for us than most to do this right because many of our best 22 players are in their 30's and a good lot of them (Johnson, Macca, Pav,and Sandi) are crucial to our chances of having a successful finals campaign.

The way I see it, going by the team composition of our teams for the first 9 rounds, this is the most likely best 22 that the math committee have in mind leading into the finals. (I know there will be dissent among us about who the 21st - 22nd player will be, but I'm just basing this on the last few team selections with no changes.)

B Clancee Pearce, Luke McPharlin, Lee Spurr
HB Garrick Ibbotson, Michael Johnson, Cameron Sutcliffe
C Paul Duffield, Nat Fyfe, Danyle Pearce
HF Chris Mayne, Matt Taberner, Michael Walters
F Zac Clarke, Matthew Pavlich, Hayden Ballantyne
Fol Aaron Sandilands, David Mundy, Lachie Neale
I/C Nick Suban, Michael Barlow, Stephen Hill
Sub Tommy Sheridan


Our next cabs off the rank for call up in the event of injury/suspension (based on who have been emergency or who have played in and out of the team for the last nine rounds):

DeBoer (def forward/utility), Crozier (small forward/mid), Hannath (ruck/forward)
Griffin (ruck), Mzungu (mid/utility)
A Pearce (KPD), Z Dawson (KPD --> out 6-8 weeks), Silvagni (KPD --> 6-8 weeks)

Youngsters showing something in Peel Thunder:

Grey (small defender) -- physically ready, still developing his disposal
Weller (mid) -- might not be physically ready to crash-bang with the big bodies
Blakely (mid) -- physically ready, but we behind our first tier of in-and-under brigade available
Langdon -- apologies, I don't know what role he plays usually
Ballard -- rookie, unlikely to get a call up in as we have the most depth in our midfield relative to other lines

Apeness (KPF) - currently injured, unlikely to be ready for a call up after all games missed
Duffy (small forward/mid) - hasn't been showing in the WAFL but seems to step up in AFL level (so smokey)


The way I see it, we're most vulnerable in our defense once our first line falls (and has now fallen) given that our usual reliable back ups (Dawson, SOS) are both down with injury themselves. With Macca also needing to be managed leading into the pointy end of the season, we're in a bit of strife. I'm not sure our backline can carry Alex Pearce without the experience of Macca, Zac, or Johnno in it, and which games we could do it again. Tanner might get a rookie elevation if he shows something this weekend, just to shore us up; doesn't have the class of our usual stalwarts, but is physically ready and will compete. We lack a general back there, though, which is concerning.
 
It's important to note that our team trains in two groups, the main group are most familiar with the positioning and patterns of our game plan and any player coming in from the WAFL group- no matter how talented/fit/mature - will be a downgrade and a liability in regards to being in the place his team mates expect.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The defence and forward line has always been the bare minimum in terms of depth. We have alot of the same types in Sheridan/Suttclife/Duffield in that more of the flanker however often exposed in terms of strength and mentality. Last night was a clear example of carrying players that are not physically set up for the hard, stoppage type game plan we have been using for a few seasons. Croizer deserves more game time as he can create and offers more up forward with Mayne, Walters and Ballas. Sheridan and/or Suttcliffe to come out of that team for Mzungu and Croizer. Ibbotson plays Duffield's role better this season and Clancee is so effective running out of the back hence we only really need one other flanker.
 
Backline depth is pressing at the moment, but we have GC, Bye, Collingwood (home), Lions (home). Should be enough time for Johnno/Dawson to be right.

We have the depth, we just need to give them a run (Mzungu, one of the rookies) or a couple of games in a row (Crozier, Sheridan).

Tayl0r said:
It's important to note that our team trains in two groups, the main group are most familiar with the positioning and patterns of our game plan and any player coming in from the WAFL group- no matter how talented/fit/mature - will be a downgrade and a liability in regards to being in the place his team mates expect.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's too much of a concern right now, given the depth consists of guys like Mzungu, Sheridan, Crozier, DeBoer who all have experience in the requirements. If we're forced to play anyone further down the list than that then i'll agree. Alex Pearce looked a little unsure of positioning, which will be worse if we have to play him without Johnno to guide him. But given the games we have coming up i'm not worried about that.
 
Tayl0r said:
It's important to note that our team trains in two groups, the main group are most familiar with the positioning and patterns of our game plan and any player coming in from the WAFL group- no matter how talented/fit/mature - will be a downgrade and a liability in regards to being in the place his team mates expect.
Click to expand...
This.

Those in other threads demanding games be handed to the WAFL kids need to sit back and have a calm look at things. Calls for Sutcliffe and Duffield to be replaced with junior mids are ill-informed, rash calls. If the incumbent fringe midfielders aren't going to be good enough to get us there in the end (Suban, Pearce etc), the kids certainly aren't. These guys know the structure, have put in solid years thus far, in fact both are arguably in career best form. They have had a couple of down games the past fortnight; a tough slog in the wet against a valiant Adelaide (Suban was great imo) and they suffered as a result last night against a rampant Richmond along with every other bloke out there in purple.

Our issues as raised by the OP are our spine, there we have no suitable replacement (besides ruck, both Griff and Hannath aren't any better options up forward than Clarke or Tabs) with our injuries to Apeness, MJ, Dawson and SOS. Alex Pearce has two games under his belt, that is hardly a like for like, no matter how promising he looks for the long term. His inexperience requires constant direction and back up from our senior backmen and our senior players looked hesitant to bring him into the game for fear of exposing him, requiring them to look for the next option placing them under unnecessary extra pressure. Getting games into Blakely, Weller, Grey, Langdon and co aren't going to cover these deficiencies, they will in fact place more pressure on more senior players to support them, covering their defensive lapses, rushed disposals by foot and sloppy handpasses under pressure to senior players in worse positions than them as would be expected from kids getting their first taste of the big leagues.

I think as a fan base we need to realise that if our best 22-26 cant do it, it ain't getting done. Those calling for wholesale changes are effectively calling for a rebuild.
 
Do people realise that the 'kids' can only learn structures if they get games.

How long are we going to persist with spuds just because they have experience. Some of the kids we got will give the same output and by the looks of things are fitter than some of our players.
 
Banker said:
Do people realise that the 'kids' can only learn structures if they get games.

How long are we going to persist with spuds just because they have experience. Some of the kids we got will give the same output and by the looks of things are fitter than some of our players.
Click to expand...
We don't have the luxury of letting them figure it out this year, that's the point. Why should Mzungu, Crozier, Sheridan sit out so some of the kids can work it out?

Next year I will find it hard to disagree. Why jeopardise our last full flag tilt on a hunch? I would rather stick with the proven performers this year thanks. I want a premiership, not a NAB rising star.
 
TheInjuryFactory said:
We don't have the luxury of letting them figure it out this year, that's the point. Why should Mzungu, Crozier, Sheridan sit out so some of the kids can work it out?

Next year I will find it hard to disagree. Why jeopardise our last full flag tilt on a hunch? I would rather stick with the proven performers this year thanks. I want a premiership, not a NAB rising star.
Click to expand...

Who said those lot should sit out?

Against the weaker teams what do we have to lose by trying out someone like Blakely? Lets face it when pressure ramps up Clarke and Suban crumble we may as well have give games to kids who might give us better output.

Come finals time if D.Pearce, Suban and Clarke havent had games off to rest we're in trouble. These players can't handle playing a whole season .
 
Banker said:
Who said those lot should sit out?

Against the weaker teams what do we have to lose by trying out someone like Blakely? Lets face it when pressure ramps up Clarke and Suban crumble we may as well have give games to kids who might give us better output.

Come finals time if D.Pearce, Suban and Clarke havent had games off to rest we're in trouble. These players can't handle playing a whole season .
Click to expand...
The kids are right at the back of the queue, far behind those guys. I think the idea of resting seniors against weaker sides is where we will come undone. Go in with that attitude and we will get beat. Besides, I thought you were suggesting we need to get games into them for this year? if it is just because you feel that Suban and Pearce etc can't play a full season that defeats the purpose of getting them in. That's what our depth players are for and they've earned that right to step in and fill the breach.

Clarke could do with a spell, no arguments there and Griff or Hannath could come in and do the job I'm sure. Suban has been good, he's an easy scapegoat but he has been much improved this year.
D.Pearce is in career best form. We don't have a like for like replacement for him either, perhaps Sheridan but certainly not Weller, Blakely or Langdon at this stage. We need D.Pearce in to free up Hill.

I think after the fortnight we've had its easy to single out the few rather than hold the group accountable. Pav was bloody ordinary last night, didn't do much against Adelaide either, do we send him to Peel on the back of that?
 
TheInjuryFactory said:
This.

Those in other threads demanding games be handed to the WAFL kids need to sit back and have a calm look at things. Calls for Sutcliffe and Duffield to be replaced with junior mids are ill-informed, rash calls. If the incumbent fringe midfielders aren't going to be good enough to get us there in the end (Suban, Pearce etc), the kids certainly aren't. These guys know the structure, have put in solid years thus far, in fact both are arguably in career best form. They have had a couple of down games the past fortnight; a tough slog in the wet against a valiant Adelaide (Suban was great imo) and they suffered as a result last night against a rampant Richmond along with every other bloke out there in purple.

Our issues as raised by the OP are our spine, there we have no suitable replacement (besides ruck, both Griff and Hannath aren't any better options up forward than Clarke or Tabs) with our injuries to Apeness, MJ, Dawson and SOS. Alex Pearce has two games under his belt, that is hardly a like for like, no matter how promising he looks for the long term. His inexperience requires constant direction and back up from our senior backmen and our senior players looked hesitant to bring him into the game for fear of exposing him, requiring them to look for the next option placing them under unnecessary extra pressure. Getting games into Blakely, Weller, Grey, Langdon and co aren't going to cover these deficiencies, they will in fact place more pressure on more senior players to support them, covering their defensive lapses, rushed disposals by foot and sloppy handpasses under pressure to senior players in worse positions than them as would be expected from kids getting their first taste of the big leagues.

I think as a fan base we need to realise that if our best 22-26 cant do it, it ain't getting done. Those calling for wholesale changes are effectively calling for a rebuild.
Click to expand...

Sure...why change players ever?

Calls for players 19-22 to be replaced when not performing is not a rebuild...its offering opportunity and ensuring players are expected to perform.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

salim malik said:
Grey,Weller, Langdon,Smith were crap last week and today for Peel and don't deserve to replace any one in the 22.
Click to expand...

Sure. In your opinion. E Shed doesn't agree with you on Weller., and after watching Sutcliffe and Duffield spud it up for weeks we can massage it so some youth comes in. Sheridan was ordinary last night and in the last game I saw of Peel's a few weeks ago was average.

Mzungu and Spurr can play this week. Blakely etc can be rotated through.

I'm not sure we gain a whole lot by continual rotation of De Boer/Suban types or by allowing substandard performances to continue
 
Lach72 said:
Sure. In your opinion. E Shed doesn't agree with you on Weller., and after watching Sutcliffe and Duffield spud it up for weeks we can massage it so some youth comes in. Sheridan was ordinary last night and in the last game I saw of Peel's a few weeks ago was average.

Mzungu and Spurr can play this week. Blakely etc can be rotated through.

I'm not sure we gain a whole lot by continual rotation of De Boer/Suban types or by allowing substandard performances to continue
Click to expand...

Weller ,Grey and Langdon are spuds in the WAFL at the minute.Imagine how they would have gone last night.They aren't ready yet.Of course its only my opinion but Harry who watches most of Peels games is of the same opinion.Mzungu and MDB are in a different category,not youth but both could come in for Duff and Sutcliffe.
 
One of the things I was hoping to get opinions on in this thread would be how we should line up in the next few rounds given the injury crisis that has currently hit our back line. We've already established that KPD are thin on the ground right now, and even if they were not, it is probably a priority for the match committee to be able to manage Macca and Johnson (although the injuries to them seem to be forcing our hand and doing this for us).

We have the most depth in the midfield, although the players rotating through are of different types. Given that we need to cover our backs, how do you reckon we would massage the list using what we do have in the cupboard without being too vulnerable there? Team defence can only do so much if you don't have the right people in your last line of defence.

Tabs, Mayne, and Clarke tried down back, for example, with semi-disastrous results last night. Robbing Peter to pay Paul, IMO, but what other alternatives do we have? Can Hannath play back?
 
Grape Bear said:
One of the things I was hoping to get opinions on in this thread would be how we should line up in the next few rounds given the injury crisis that has currently hit our back line. We've already established that KPD are thin on the ground right now, and even if they were not, it is probably a priority for the match committee to be able to manage Macca and Johnson (although the injuries to them seem to be forcing our hand and doing this for us).

We have the most depth in the midfield, although the players rotating through are of different types. Given that we need to cover our backs, how do you reckon we would massage the list using what we do have in the cupboard without being too vulnerable there? Team defence can only do so much if you don't have the right people in your last line of defence.

Tabs, Mayne, and Clarke tried down back, for example, with semi-disastrous results last night. Robbing Peter to pay Paul, IMO, but what other alternatives do we have? Can Hannath play back?
Click to expand...
Mundy would be good for a Johnno replacement temporarily, IMO. Yep, robbing Peter, but, we have virtually no midfield injuries. Ideally, Mundy is in the middle, but I think he'd be a good Johnno replacement. He's tall enough and has great disposal and ability to read the play like Johnno. Gets rested down back during games too so he's sort of familiar with the defence set ups. Plus was initially recruited as a full back. McPharlin and a couple of kids just won't cut it. Maybe against GC, but not Collingwood. Playing Mundy down back might also be a good idea as we'd get a look at him playing tall to gauge whether or not to try it against better teams without risking too much as GC are not only a rabble but depleted themselves.

I know playing an A grade mid a full back is pretty nutty, but we are getting desperate.
 
Grape Bear said:
One of the things I was hoping to get opinions on in this thread would be how we should line up in the next few rounds given the injury crisis that has currently hit our back line. We've already established that KPD are thin on the ground right now, and even if they were not, it is probably a priority for the match committee to be able to manage Macca and Johnson (although the injuries to them seem to be forcing our hand and doing this for us).

We have the most depth in the midfield, although the players rotating through are of different types. Given that we need to cover our backs, how do you reckon we would massage the list using what we do have in the cupboard without being too vulnerable there? Team defence can only do so much if you don't have the right people in your last line of defence.

Tabs, Mayne, and Clarke tried down back, for example, with semi-disastrous results last night. Robbing Peter to pay Paul, IMO, but what other alternatives do we have? Can Hannath play back?
Click to expand...

At least until A Pearce is ready, I'd play Mayne in defence and replace him with Blakely who would play a high half forward role/leading forward.
 
Scham said:
At least until A Pearce is ready, I'd play Mayne in defence and replace him with Blakely who would play a high half forward role/leading forward.
Click to expand...

Isn't Blakely more an inside mid? How tall is Crozier and can be move into Mayne's role as a third tall?

Don't pelt me, I'm just trying to think laterally - maybe we should play Ballas as a small defender, since his radar is so off right now. ;)
 
Agenfrida said:
Mundy would be good for a Johnno replacement temporarily, IMO. Yep, robbing Peter, but, we have virtually no midfield injuries. Ideally, Mundy is in the middle, but I think he'd be a good Johnno replacement. He's tall enough and has great disposal and ability to read the play like Johnno. Gets rested down back during games too so he's sort of familiar with the defence set ups. Plus was initially recruited as a full back. McPharlin and a couple of kids just won't cut it. Maybe against GC, but not Collingwood. Playing Mundy down back might also be a good idea as we'd get a look at him playing tall to gauge whether or not to try it against better teams without risking too much as GC are not only a rabble but depleted themselves.

I know playing an A grade mid a full back is pretty nutty, but we are getting desperate.
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea Agenfrida. He's got history in the 3rd tall defender role back in the day when Grover was our FB and McPharlin CHB. He provided good support to the undersized Groves. It does rob the midfield though as you say but we also do need to expose the likes of Crozier to more midfield time and against GC it could be the ideal opp. Or bring Blakely or Gu in to the midfield maybe.

It should only be for one game as Pearce should be available after the bye and then Jonno the week after maybe.
 
Lach72 said:
Sure. In your opinion. E Shed doesn't agree with you on Weller., and after watching Sutcliffe and Duffield spud it up for weeks we can massage it so some youth comes in. Sheridan was ordinary last night and in the last game I saw of Peel's a few weeks ago was average.

Mzungu and Spurr can play this week. Blakely etc can be rotated through.

I'm not sure we gain a whole lot by continual rotation of De Boer/Suban types or by allowing substandard performances to continue
Click to expand...
Exactly. Look at what Duggan has done for the WC midfield or DeGoey at Collingwood. Hell, remember when we played a skinny 18 year old kid called Hill and how suddenly we were going end to end and kicking goals.
No one is saying wholesale changes but Weller or Blakely can add smarts and class over someone like Suban. It changes the dynamics. And either of those kids can easily hold their own at the top level.
 
Grape Bear said:
Isn't Blakely more an inside mid? How tall is Crozier and can be move into Mayne's role as a third tall?

Don't pelt me, I'm just trying to think laterally - maybe we should play Ballas as a small defender, since his radar is so off right now. ;)
Click to expand...

To use Blakely, a young, tall inside mid as a forward option would need you to think laterally GB ;)

And yes, Crozier can play in Maynes role, most definitely.

Balla as a small defender is a bridge too far for me sorry. Can't see it working and it would take away one of best weapons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

King Huskii
2023 and onwards/depth and draft strength
2 3
Replies
61
Views
5K
theGav56
T

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top