Will Mattaes get a game in round 1?

[Vortex]

At the rate we’re going - Peris will get a game

And I’m not even sure he can play footy?

that's classic B.M, made me chuckle, I'm not too concerned though, we have depth...apparently.

The list does have depth, unfortunately the preseason injury list is extensive and the depth is already being tested

Absolutely we don't have depth, we have zero depth by true definition, I think our difference of opinion is clearly in your understanding of what it is meant by list depth. Do you play chess by chance?, depth in AFL is similar to piece value on a chess board.

You can lose players and still create a winnable position, and in the case of AFL the win is the flag.

An example would be losing Roo for 10 weeks in 2010, or Richmond losing a key tall in 2017.

Depth is when you have a critical mass of AFL grade players beyond your best 22, or versatile types that can play multiple positions, or tweaks to a game plan or all of these components combined. Depth provides backup and compensation to maintain strength to keep you in contention for the flag.

Our list is still extremely fragile, not only physically but mentally and is light years from winning a flag and is zero chance of making finals this year.

Harsh but I'm dealing in reality.

You are entitled to your own narratives but please don't confuse those with reality.

You seem confused yourself, you said I'm entitled to my own narrative but then contunue to tell me not to confuse it?

If it's my entitlement aren't I allowed to tell it my way?

I'd be interested to hear your version of what you think depth is.

No. I'm not confused.

In chess, you have strategy, not depth, all the pieces are equal, with the exception that one player get to go first.

In the AFL, you have a list of players, all clubs get the same amount and you have a salary cap, I think those are all equal too.

Outside of that, you have process and personnel. Those are realities.

Our depth, in reality, is the portion of players available outside of the team picked for selection on the day.

My reference was to your last sentence. You are dealing in rhetoric not reality.

Ok so not a chess player then?

Chess has a valuation system a bit like AFL lists do, in chess it is as follows:

Pawn = 1 point
Knight = 3 points
Bishop = 3 points
Rook = 5 points
Queen = 9 points

And as we know the AFL player valuation is A, B, C, D etc, Queens would be your elite grade/A grade, pawns would be your C graders. Generally if you lose your queen the game is over depending on the strength your opposition, however if you still say have good combination pieces like two rooks left then you can still win but again depends on the strength of your opponent and the value of piece your opponent also has left at his/her disposal.

As I said, my version of depth, and I think it's widely accepted, is as mentioned previously and as follow:

a critical mass of AFL grade players beyond your best 22, or versatile types that can play multiple positions, or tweaks to a game plan or all of these components combined. Depth provides backup and compensation to maintain strength to keep you in contention for the flag.


your version of depth which is:

Our depth, in reality, is the portion of players available outside of the team picked for selection on the day.

which is flawed based on the players we have outside our team that can come in and help us win the game which as I said is the flag.
presently we do not have enough depth to win a flag even at absolute full strength, so how can we have any depth in terms of winning a flag or even being in contention by bringing in players from outside our absolute best possible 22 which I say on its own cannot win the flag.

repeating my two best examples of depth capable of being in contention or winning the flag was our 2010 team when we lost roo for 10 weeks, and the 2017 team when they lost a key tall but had the depth to win the flag.

A lot of similarities with the valuation system used for chess pieces AND maintaining a winning strategy and tactics.

As I said, rhetoric.

yeah not sure what your point is, but it's folly to argue we have depth in any serious discussion.

[shanegrambeau]

With Billings out the Poo seems like a lock for round one.

Unavailable: King, Hayes, Jones, Billings, McKenzie, Allison, Hotton, Keeler, McLennan


B: Paton, Howard, Wilkie
HB: Sinclair, Battle, NWM
C: Hill, Steele, Wood
HF: Gresham, Membrey, Owens
F: Higgins, Sharman, Butler

Foll: Marshall, Crouch, Windhager
Int: Clark, Ross, Phillipou, Webster
Sub: Coffield

Emg: Bytel, Cordy, Stocker, Campbell

Gosh.

I didn't watch the practise game.

And I have already moved my bones by saying that on paper, knowing what we think we know, it looks like a bottom-sixish kinda team.
I know it was just practise and perhaps no injuries were the priority (sorry JB), but practising letting Melbourne whip us by 50 odd would need to be contextualized by the bosses and players.

So what is my point?

Question One
To ask you lot, sertiously, is Paton still the pre-Roughhead walk-in he was and if so, should he be playing back?

Seriuosly, looking at that team you post MSG, It looks so bloody ordinary..(Of course I don't have a clue how much is just hype, but when I watch SaintsTV, and I see that smile on good 'ol '(young) Jake's face taking a stern complexion, I reckon I am not alone.

Those that pick them selves as AFL players right now,

Sincs
NWM
Howard
Hill
Members
Steele (just?)
Gresh
Marshall
Wilkie

9 players!

It sounds like Windy has come off the pace a tad, and Bytel hasn't come on.

Question Two
Please give a moron some current intel on;

For simplicity's sake, offer a grade on a scale x/5 based on the likelihood that they could seriously pack som punch and make a real difference to moving up the ladder in '23. (not based on good guy-bad guy, lucky-unlucky, deserves-a-go, doesn't-had-his-chances, potential-in '24, '25 etc.)
I am talking wins in 2023.

Paton,
Battle,
Wood
Owens
Crouch
Windhager
Clark
Ross
Phillipou
Webster
Coffield
Bytel,
Cordy,
Stocker
Campbell
Higgins
Butler
Sharman

[saynta]

At the rate we’re going - Peris will get a game

And I’m not even sure he can play footy?

that's classic B.M, made me chuckle, I'm not too concerned though, we have depth...apparently.

The list does have depth, unfortunately the preseason injury list is extensive and the depth is already being tested

Absolutely we don't have depth, we have zero depth by true definition, I think our difference of opinion is clearly in your understanding of what it is meant by list depth. Do you play chess by chance?, depth in AFL is similar to piece value on a chess board.

You can lose players and still create a winnable position, and in the case of AFL the win is the flag.

An example would be losing Roo for 10 weeks in 2010, or Richmond losing a key tall in 2017.

Depth is when you have a critical mass of AFL grade players beyond your best 22, or versatile types that can play multiple positions, or tweaks to a game plan or all of these components combined. Depth provides backup and compensation to maintain strength to keep you in contention for the flag.

Our list is still extremely fragile, not only physically but mentally and is light years from winning a flag and is zero chance of making finals this year.

Harsh but I'm dealing in reality.

Bookmarked.

[Templar]

Question One
To ask you lot, sertiously, is Paton still the pre-Roughhead walk-in he was and if so, should he be playing back?

I only watched it on telly plus got distracted more than a couple of times but from what I saw Paton played a shocker. (More obvious when they trialled him on the wing)

[CQ SAINT]

At the rate we’re going - Peris will get a game

And I’m not even sure he can play footy?

that's classic B.M, made me chuckle, I'm not too concerned though, we have depth...apparently.

The list does have depth, unfortunately the preseason injury list is extensive and the depth is already being tested

Absolutely we don't have depth, we have zero depth by true definition, I think our difference of opinion is clearly in your understanding of what it is meant by list depth. Do you play chess by chance?, depth in AFL is similar to piece value on a chess board.

You can lose players and still create a winnable position, and in the case of AFL the win is the flag.

An example would be losing Roo for 10 weeks in 2010, or Richmond losing a key tall in 2017.

Depth is when you have a critical mass of AFL grade players beyond your best 22, or versatile types that can play multiple positions, or tweaks to a game plan or all of these components combined. Depth provides backup and compensation to maintain strength to keep you in contention for the flag.

Our list is still extremely fragile, not only physically but mentally and is light years from winning a flag and is zero chance of making finals this year.

Harsh but I'm dealing in reality.

You are entitled to your own narratives but please don't confuse those with reality.

You seem confused yourself, you said I'm entitled to my own narrative but then contunue to tell me not to confuse it?

If it's my entitlement aren't I allowed to tell it my way?

I'd be interested to hear your version of what you think depth is.

No. I'm not confused.

In chess, you have strategy, not depth, all the pieces are equal, with the exception that one player get to go first.

In the AFL, you have a list of players, all clubs get the same amount and you have a salary cap, I think those are all equal too.

Outside of that, you have process and personnel. Those are realities.

Our depth, in reality, is the portion of players available outside of the team picked for selection on the day.

My reference was to your last sentence. You are dealing in rhetoric not reality.

Ok so not a chess player then?

Chess has a valuation system a bit like AFL lists do, in chess it is as follows:

Pawn = 1 point
Knight = 3 points
Bishop = 3 points
Rook = 5 points
Queen = 9 points

And as we know the AFL player valuation is A, B, C, D etc, Queens would be your elite grade/A grade, pawns would be your C graders. Generally if you lose your queen the game is over depending on the strength your opposition, however if you still say have good combination pieces like two rooks left then you can still win but again depends on the strength of your opponent and the value of piece your opponent also has left at his/her disposal.

As I said, my version of depth, and I think it's widely accepted, is as mentioned previously and as follow:

a critical mass of AFL grade players beyond your best 22, or versatile types that can play multiple positions, or tweaks to a game plan or all of these components combined. Depth provides backup and compensation to maintain strength to keep you in contention for the flag.


your version of depth which is:

Our depth, in reality, is the portion of players available outside of the team picked for selection on the day.

which is flawed based on the players we have outside our team that can come in and help us win the game which as I said is the flag.
presently we do not have enough depth to win a flag even at absolute full strength, so how can we have any depth in terms of winning a flag or even being in contention by bringing in players from outside our absolute best possible 22 which I say on its own cannot win the flag.

repeating my two best examples of depth capable of being in contention or winning the flag was our 2010 team when we lost roo for 10 weeks, and the 2017 team when they lost a key tall but had the depth to win the flag.

A lot of similarities with the valuation system used for chess pieces AND maintaining a winning strategy and tactics.

As I said, rhetoric.

yeah not sure what your point is, but it's folly to argue we have depth in any serious discussion.

I can't really spell it out any clearer Vortex. Sorry mate.

[Vortex]

I can't really spell it out any clearer Vortex. Sorry mate.

In the game of chess they call that stalemate.

[saynta]

With Billings out the Poo seems like a lock for round one.

Unavailable: King, Hayes, Jones, Billings, McKenzie, Allison, Hotton, Keeler, McLennan


B: Paton, Howard, Wilkie
HB: Sinclair, Battle, NWM
C: Hill, Steele, Wood
HF: Gresham, Membrey, Owens
F: Higgins, Sharman, Butler

Foll: Marshall, Crouch, Windhager
Int: Clark, Ross, Phillipou, Webster
Sub: Coffield

Emg: Bytel, Cordy, Stocker, Campbell

Gosh.

I didn't watch the practise game.

And I have already moved my bones by saying that on paper, knowing what we think we know, it looks like a bottom-sixish kinda team.
I know it was just practise and perhaps no injuries were the priority (sorry JB), but practising letting Melbourne whip us by 50 odd would need to be contextualized by the bosses and players.

So what is my point?

Question One
To ask you lot, sertiously, is Paton still the pre-Roughhead walk-in he was and if so, should he be playing back?

Seriuosly, looking at that team you post MSG, It looks so bloody ordinary..(Of course I don't have a clue how much is just hype, but when I watch SaintsTV, and I see that smile on good 'ol '(young) Jake's face taking a stern complexion, I reckon I am not alone.

Those that pick them selves as AFL players right now,

Sincs
NWM
Howard
Hill
Members
Steele (just?)
Gresh
Marshall
Wilkie

9 players!

It sounds like Windy has come off the pace a tad, and Bytel hasn't come on.

Question Two
Please give a moron some current intel on;

For simplicity's sake, offer a grade on a scale x/5 based on the likelihood that they could seriously pack som punch and make a real difference to moving up the ladder in '23. (not based on good guy-bad guy, lucky-unlucky, deserves-a-go, doesn't-had-his-chances, potential-in '24, '25 etc.)
I am talking wins in 2023.

Paton,
Battle,
Wood
Owens
Crouch
Windhager
Clark
Ross
Phillipou
Webster
Coffield
Bytel,
Cordy,
Stocker
Campbell
Higgins
Butler
Sharman

Windy was playing a lockdown roll. He completely blanked his much touted opponent.

[CQ SAINT]

I can't really spell it out any clearer Vortex. Sorry mate.

In the game of chess they call that stalemate.

Ah. That was clever.

I just thought I was out of my depth.

[CQ SAINT]

Just out of interest, if you recruit 8 x 18 years olds in 2 years, would you think a rebuild is already underway?

[Vortex]

I can't really spell it out any clearer Vortex. Sorry mate.

In the game of chess they call that stalemate.

Ah. That was clever.

I just thought I was out of my depth.

Lovely weather we are having today.

[Vortex]

Just out of interest, if you recruit 8 x 18 years olds in 2 years, would you think a rebuild is already underway?

I'm gunna say yes.

[CQ SAINT]

Just out of interest, if you recruit 8 x 18 years olds in 2 years, would you think a rebuild is already underway?

I'm gunna say yes.

Cool. How did you rate Caminiti and Sharmans efforts when the depth players came on after p5 and we outscored Melbourne for the rest of the game.

[shanegrambeau]

With Billings out the Poo seems like a lock for round one.

Unavailable: King, Hayes, Jones, Billings, McKenzie, Allison, Hotton, Keeler, McLennan


B: Paton, Howard, Wilkie
HB: Sinclair, Battle, NWM
C: Hill, Steele, Wood
HF: Gresham, Membrey, Owens
F: Higgins, Sharman, Butler

Foll: Marshall, Crouch, Windhager
Int: Clark, Ross, Phillipou, Webster
Sub: Coffield

Emg: Bytel, Cordy, Stocker, Campbell

Gosh.

I didn't watch the practise game.

And I have already moved my bones by saying that on paper, knowing what we think we know, it looks like a bottom-sixish kinda team.
I know it was just practise and perhaps no injuries were the priority (sorry JB), but practising letting Melbourne whip us by 50 odd would need to be contextualized by the bosses and players.

So what is my point?

Question One
To ask you lot, sertiously, is Paton still the pre-Roughhead walk-in he was and if so, should he be playing back?

Seriuosly, looking at that team you post MSG, It looks so bloody ordinary..(Of course I don't have a clue how much is just hype, but when I watch SaintsTV, and I see that smile on good 'ol '(young) Jake's face taking a stern complexion, I reckon I am not alone.

Those that pick them selves as AFL players right now,

Sincs
NWM
Howard
Hill
Members
Steele (just?)
Gresh
Marshall
Wilkie

9 players!

It sounds like Windy has come off the pace a tad, and Bytel hasn't come on.

Question Two
Please give a moron some current intel on;

For simplicity's sake, offer a grade on a scale x/5 based on the likelihood that they could seriously pack som punch and make a real difference to moving up the ladder in '23. (not based on good guy-bad guy, lucky-unlucky, deserves-a-go, doesn't-had-his-chances, potential-in '24, '25 etc.)
I am talking wins in 2023.

Paton,
Battle,
Wood
Owens
Crouch
Windhager
Clark
Ross
Phillipou
Webster
Coffield
Bytel,
Cordy,
Stocker
Campbell
Higgins
Butler
Sharman

Windy was playing a lockdown roll. He completely blanked his much touted opponent.

Oliver?

[Vortex]

Just out of interest, if you recruit 8 x 18 years olds in 2 years, would you think a rebuild is already underway?

I'm gunna say yes.

Cool. How did you rate Caminiti and Sharmans efforts when the depth players came on after p5 and we outscored Melbourne for the rest of the game.

I thought they did ok for where they are both at.

[CQ SAINT]

It might be possible with the way you derived your definition of depth, that we lack 'class' not depth.
I'd summize, that when the depth players came on, Caminiti and Sharman, as young and unexperienced as the are, looked a class above, at time. Caminiti getting mobile drawing 2 opponents and Sharman clever with leading, positioning, team play and skills. That's just my opinion though.

[Otiman]

And I have already moved my bones by saying that on paper, knowing what we think we know, it looks like a bottom-sixish kinda team.

This is a good point, and should play into our selection.

Assume these are the options, how would you pick a team:

- Bottom 6 playing a team which includes mid-career players who have peaked at 'GOP' and aren't likely to improve.
- Bottom 4 playing a team which includes a number of recent draftees, trying to build their potential into results.
- Or as our strategy was in 2020 - ignore the draft, recruit some top up players and finish 6th

There's a time for each of those strategies. I'm comfortable with putting games and development into the kids, even if it sacrifices 3-4 wins.

[Vortex]

It might be possible with the way you derived your definition of depth, that we lack 'class' not depth.
I'd summize, that when the depth players came on, Caminiti and Sharman, as young and unexperienced as the are, looked a class above, at time. Caminiti getting mobile drawing 2 opponents and Sharman clever with leading, positioning, team play and skills. That's just my opinion though.

I'd argue that class and depth are interchangeable in terms of definition for depth I offered, however very important to understand the measurement system my definition uses which is as I say your teams ability to win the premiership.

Using the phase 5,6 and 7 of Fridays game which was essentially the B sides is an incorrect measurement system, and so it's a question of how many of those players in the last 3 phases would be capable of helping a GF team win in the flag in 2023. I think you'd agree that Sharman and Caminiti wouldn't be a chance of being selected in a GF side this year?

My interpretation of Bangers sides he offered up as an example of claimed depth was significantly potential-biased and by that I mean the potential to turn into flag type AFL player and not actual ability to help us win a flag this year or the next few.

[The Fireman]

Is there a babble filter in existence?

[saynta]

With Billings out the Poo seems like a lock for round one.

Unavailable: King, Hayes, Jones, Billings, McKenzie, Allison, Hotton, Keeler, McLennan


B: Paton, Howard, Wilkie
HB: Sinclair, Battle, NWM
C: Hill, Steele, Wood
HF: Gresham, Membrey, Owens
F: Higgins, Sharman, Butler

Foll: Marshall, Crouch, Windhager
Int: Clark, Ross, Phillipou, Webster
Sub: Coffield

Emg: Bytel, Cordy, Stocker, Campbell

Gosh.

I didn't watch the practise game.

And I have already moved my bones by saying that on paper, knowing what we think we know, it looks like a bottom-sixish kinda team.
I know it was just practise and perhaps no injuries were the priority (sorry JB), but practising letting Melbourne whip us by 50 odd would need to be contextualized by the bosses and players.

So what is my point?

Question One
To ask you lot, sertiously, is Paton still the pre-Roughhead walk-in he was and if so, should he be playing back?

Seriuosly, looking at that team you post MSG, It looks so bloody ordinary..(Of course I don't have a clue how much is just hype, but when I watch SaintsTV, and I see that smile on good 'ol '(young) Jake's face taking a stern complexion, I reckon I am not alone.

Those that pick them selves as AFL players right now,

Sincs
NWM
Howard
Hill
Members
Steele (just?)
Gresh
Marshall
Wilkie

9 players!

It sounds like Windy has come off the pace a tad, and Bytel hasn't come on.

Question Two
Please give a moron some current intel on;

For simplicity's sake, offer a grade on a scale x/5 based on the likelihood that they could seriously pack som punch and make a real difference to moving up the ladder in '23. (not based on good guy-bad guy, lucky-unlucky, deserves-a-go, doesn't-had-his-chances, potential-in '24, '25 etc.)
I am talking wins in 2023.

Paton,
Battle,
Wood
Owens
Crouch
Windhager
Clark
Ross
Phillipou
Webster
Coffield
Bytel,
Cordy,
Stocker
Campbell
Higgins
Butler
Sharman

Windy was playing a lockdown roll. He completely blanked his much touted opponent.

Oliver?

No. Brayshaw.

[bigcarl]

With Billings out the Poo seems like a lock for round one.

Unavailable: King, Hayes, Jones, Billings, McKenzie, Allison, Hotton, Keeler, McLennan


B: Paton, Howard, Wilkie
HB: Sinclair, Battle, NWM
C: Hill, Steele, Wood
HF: Gresham, Membrey, Owens
F: Higgins, Sharman, Butler

Foll: Marshall, Crouch, Windhager
Int: Clark, Ross, Phillipou, Webster
Sub: Coffield

Emg: Bytel, Cordy, Stocker, Campbell

Gosh.

I didn't watch the practise game.

And I have already moved my bones by saying that on paper, knowing what we think we know, it looks like a bottom-sixish kinda team.
I know it was just practise and perhaps no injuries were the priority (sorry JB), but practising letting Melbourne whip us by 50 odd would need to be contextualized by the bosses and players.

So what is my point?

Question One
To ask you lot, sertiously, is Paton still the pre-Roughhead walk-in he was and if so, should he be playing back?

Seriuosly, looking at that team you post MSG, It looks so bloody ordinary..(Of course I don't have a clue how much is just hype, but when I watch SaintsTV, and I see that smile on good 'ol '(young) Jake's face taking a stern complexion, I reckon I am not alone.

Those that pick them selves as AFL players right now,

Sincs
NWM
Howard
Hill
Members
Steele (just?)
Gresh
Marshall
Wilkie

9 players!

It sounds like Windy has come off the pace a tad, and Bytel hasn't come on.

Question Two
Please give a moron some current intel on;

For simplicity's sake, offer a grade on a scale x/5 based on the likelihood that they could seriously pack som punch and make a real difference to moving up the ladder in '23. (not based on good guy-bad guy, lucky-unlucky, deserves-a-go, doesn't-had-his-chances, potential-in '24, '25 etc.)
I am talking wins in 2023.

Paton,
Battle,
Wood
Owens
Crouch
Windhager
Clark
Ross
Phillipou
Webster
Coffield
Bytel,
Cordy,
Stocker
Campbell
Higgins
Butler
Sharman

Windy was playing a lockdown roll. He completely blanked his much touted opponent.

Oliver?

No. Brayshaw.

Hope he’s not pigeonholed as purely a lockdown player as I sense he has other strings to his bow.

[saynta]

Just out of interest, if you recruit 8 x 18 years olds in 2 years, would you think a rebuild is already underway?

[shanegrambeau]

And I have already moved my bones by saying that on paper, knowing what we think we know, it looks like a bottom-sixish kinda team.

This is a good point, and should play into our selection.

Assume these are the options, how would you pick a team:

- Bottom 6 playing a team which includes mid-career players who have peaked at 'GOP' and aren't likely to improve.
- Bottom 4 playing a team which includes a number of recent draftees, trying to build their potential into results.
- Or as our strategy was in 2020 - ignore the draft, recruit some top up players and finish 6th

There's a time for each of those strategies. I'm comfortable with putting games and development into the kids, even if it sacrifices 3-4 wins.

Tough question

One the one hand..
I would play to win.

Because it is not team selection only. It is strategy. 'Picking-the-kids' and allowing them to get smashed week-in and week-out might tempt Ross to go ultra-defensive i the name of damage control.

Picking the oldens and might scapr out some wins, get some momentum and then later, perhaps, by miracle, we make some finals and the kids see the seniors execute the game plan - which is more attacking, but which leads to defeats and wins, might have a good lesson..

THat said,
GTs teams were a mix of young and old but there were a lot of inexperienced players taking on big responsibilities..

[mad saint guy]

With Billings out the Poo seems like a lock for round one.

Unavailable: King, Hayes, Jones, Billings, McKenzie, Allison, Hotton, Keeler, McLennan


B: Paton, Howard, Wilkie
HB: Sinclair, Battle, NWM
C: Hill, Steele, Wood
HF: Gresham, Membrey, Owens
F: Higgins, Sharman, Butler

Foll: Marshall, Crouch, Windhager
Int: Clark, Ross, Phillipou, Webster
Sub: Coffield

Emg: Bytel, Cordy, Stocker, Campbell

Gosh.

I didn't watch the practise game.

And I have already moved my bones by saying that on paper, knowing what we think we know, it looks like a bottom-sixish kinda team.
I know it was just practise and perhaps no injuries were the priority (sorry JB), but practising letting Melbourne whip us by 50 odd would need to be contextualized by the bosses and players.

So what is my point?

Question One
To ask you lot, sertiously, is Paton still the pre-Roughhead walk-in he was and if so, should he be playing back?

Seriuosly, looking at that team you post MSG, It looks so bloody ordinary..(Of course I don't have a clue how much is just hype, but when I watch SaintsTV, and I see that smile on good 'ol '(young) Jake's face taking a stern complexion, I reckon I am not alone.

Those that pick them selves as AFL players right now,

Sincs
NWM
Howard
Hill
Members
Steele (just?)
Gresh
Marshall
Wilkie

9 players!

It sounds like Windy has come off the pace a tad, and Bytel hasn't come on.

Question Two
Please give a moron some current intel on;

For simplicity's sake, offer a grade on a scale x/5 based on the likelihood that they could seriously pack som punch and make a real difference to moving up the ladder in '23. (not based on good guy-bad guy, lucky-unlucky, deserves-a-go, doesn't-had-his-chances, potential-in '24, '25 etc.)
I am talking wins in 2023.

I don't think the 23 that I listed is too bad to be honest. Paton gets a gig because he was genuinely a very good lock down small defender pre leg break and you rarely see someone come back at their best in the return season. Here's hoping he does make a full recovery and fulfills his potential rather than being someone who is never the same again. The jury is out but he has proven ability and I'd give him first crack, especially considering that we're likely to have Sincs and NWM playing fairly attacking roles from defence so we need a dour stopper.

Here's my appraisal of where these guys sit in 2023 (not future potential)

Developing = Not in there entirely for current merit, but young and offers certain strong attributes. Wouldn't get a game in more than a handful of teams
Backup = Similar level "Developing" but without the scope for improvement
GOP = Solid enough, would get a game in around half of most AFL teams with a fit list
Good = Almost a certain starter in every team


Paton - GOP
Battle - Good
Wood - GOP
Owens - Developing
Crouch - Good
Windhager - Good
Clark - GOP
Ross - Good
Phillipou - Developing
Webster - Backup
Coffield - GOP
Bytel - Developing
Cordy - Backup
Stocker - Backup
Campbell - Backup
Higgins - Good
Butler - GOP
Sharman - Developing


I believe Paton, Battle, Owens, Crouch, Windhager, Clark, Coffield, Higgins and Sharman can all elevate their level this season. That's where genuine improvement will come from if it happens.