2012 Predictions Pt.II

[Wernumberone]

Well most of our list is under 22 years of age.

You seem to like the age of 22 for your examples.

I looked at both lists and took the players listed on each clubs website and added up the total players from both sides that were born in or after 1990.

Richmond 16 http://www.richmondfc.com.au/players/tabid/7689/category/senior/season/2011/default.aspx

Essendon 15 http://www.essendonfc.com.au/team/list.asp

16 isn't most of your list btw....

Then i added all the games played and divided by the list number to get an average games played.

Richmond 48.73

Essendon 65.6

Now considering we have Fletch who has played almost twice as many games as your most experienced player there isn't any massive difference.

 

[obscura]

Yes, because campaigner will probably smash him.

 

[BETON5]

Seems to be a favourite saying of yours.

So are most teams lists, or near enough.

Youth doesn't automatically = improvement or success.

TBH most of richmonds posters are under 12 years of age so we have to cut them some slack. Really this is a 2012 prediction not which side has the biggest hard on material for you little scwerms. take it to the bay.
oh and fwiw richmond have 2 developed backman, good midield and 1 full forward and a ruck,not enough for the 8.

 

[liz]

Young players catch on quickly after 20 games under the belt. We'll have a few of those

Some do. Some get found out once the exuberance of youth and inexperience wears off, the coaches' expectations of their contributions (both ways) increases, and the opposition works out their weaknesses. Some suffer significant injuries that prevent them developing their skills or fitness. Others suffer a series of minor niggles that prevent them ever really establishing themselves.

The proportion of players drafted who go onto to have long careers is pretty small. Maybe Richmond's current bunch will buck the trend and all become stars but history is against them doing so en mass.

 

[Madtiger2006]

You seem to like the age of 22 for your examples.

I looked at both lists and took the players listed on each clubs website and added up the total players from both sides that were born in or after 1990.

Richmond 16 http://www.richmondfc.com.au/players/tabid/7689/category/senior/season/2011/default.aspx

Essendon 15 http://www.essendonfc.com.au/team/list.asp

16 isn't most of your list btw....

Then i added all the games played and divided by the list number to get an average games played.

Richmond 48.73

Essendon 65.6

Now considering we have Fletch who has played almost twice as many games as your most experienced player there isn't any massive difference.

That's pretty much 1 season for a young group because they wouldn't usually play every game. 1 season of fitness, size and experience more advanced

 

[demons64]

If only BF had more liam_13's. Great post and a good change up from a pure ladder predictions.

I'll second that. Sound reasoning and no huberis. Well done.

 

[Wernumberone]

That's pretty much 1 season for a young group because they wouldn't usually play every game. 1 season of fitness, size and experience more advanced

But that isn't the real life representation and is inflated for our younger players as it's only an average and because we have more senior players, like Fletch who has played app 350 games, the reality is that your young players compared to ours have probably played about the same amount of games.

I could sit down and work it out but tbh i cbf'ed and as i've said before just because you have young players doesn't equal improvement or success.

 

[DaSawx]

Too bad footy actually doesn't work like clockwork, players actually do improve at different stages and ages, and it is actually better to be good than young.

 

[GarnerSmash]

But that isn't the real life representation and is inflated for our younger players as it's only an average and because we have more senior players, like Fletch who has played app 350 games, the reality is that your young players compared to ours have probably played about the same amount of games.

I could sit down and work it out but tbh i cbf'ed and as i've said before just because you have young players doesn't equal improvement or success.

For those of you who believe that experience relates to performance:

NM:
0 games: 11
C. Delaney - A. Kennedy - M. Daw - B. McKenzie - W. Sierakowski - B. Mangan - T. Curran - B. Mabon - M. Lynch - S. Gibson - M. Warren

1-20 games: 10
S. Atley - K. Harper - C. Pedersen - J. Macmillan - B. Speight - R. Tarrant - C. Richardson - L. Delaney - A. Mullett - A. Black

20-50 games: 12
B. McKinley - J. Ziebell - L. Adams - N. Grima - L. Greenwood - G. Urquhart - B. Cunnington - R. Bastinac - S. Wright - L. Anthony - B. Warren - C. Garlett

50-100 games: 7
L. Thomas - S. McMahon - A. Edwards - S. Thompson - L. Hansen - M. Campbell - T. Goldstein

100+ games: 6
B. Harvey - D. Petrie - D. Wells - M. Firrito - A. Swallow - H. McIntosh

ESS:
0 games: 11
N. O'Brien - J. Merrett - E. Kavanagh - L. Davis - M. Baguley - L. Dalgleish - C. Dell'Olio - H. Hunter - B. Lee - A. Long - A. Steinberg

1-20 games: 4
J. Carlisle - M. Hibberd - A. Browne - M. Ross

20-50 games: 12
C. Hooker - M. Hurley - T. Pears - B. Howlett - J. Melksham - D. Myers - K. Hardingham - T. Bellchambers - D. Heppell - S. Crameri - S. Gumbleton - T. Colyer

50-100 games: 10
J. Winderlich - H. Slattery - A. Davey - S. Lonergan - H. Hocking - L. Jetta - B. Prismall - K. Reimers - C. Dempsey - D. Zaharakis

100+ games: 9
D. Fletcher - M. McVeigh - D. Hille - J. Watson - B. Stanton - A. Monfries - N. Lovett-Murray - P. Ryder - R. Dyson

RICH:
0 games: 12
D. MacDonald - T. Derickx - B. Ellis - M. Arnott - B. O'Hanlon - T. Elton - S. Morris - B. Darrou - J. Heslin - T. Gibson - S. Verrier - P. Wright

1-20 games: 8
R. Conca - J. Batchelor - J. Webberley - A. Browne - B. Helbig - B. Griffiths - D. Grimes - M. Dea

20-50 games: 9
B. Houli - A. Graham - T. Vickery - A. Rance - D. Martin - D. Conners - J. Post - D. Astbury - A. Maric

50-100 games: 10
J. Reiwoldt - S. Edwards - L. McGuane - K. Moore - M. White - I. Maric - J. King - T. Cotchin - S. Grigg - R. Nahas

100+ games: 6
C. Newman - B. Deledio - B. Miller - S. Tuck - N. Foley - D. Jackson

MEL:
0 games: 9
R. Taggert - T. Davis - L. Cook - J. Tynan - T. Couch - K. Lawrence - J. Magner - J. Sheehan - L. Williams

1-20 games: 12
M. Evans - D. Nicholson - J. Fitzpatrick - T. McDonald - M. Gawn - S. Blease - J. Spencer - J. Strauss - J. Howe - L. Tapscott - J. Gysberts - R. Bail

20-50 games: 7
J. Sellar - N. Jetta - J. Grimes - L. Jurrah - J. McKenzie - J. Trengove - J. Watts

50-100 games: 10
R. Petterd - S. Martin - J. Bennell - C. Garland - C. Morton - L. Dunn - M. Clark - J. Frawley - M. Bate - C. Bartram

100+ games: 8
J. Macdonald - M. Jamar - N. Jones - C. Sylvia - J. Rivers - B. Moloney - A. Davey - B. Green

Make of it what you will.

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Western Bulldogs - Again very harsh. How could a top 4 team from a couple of years back finish behind Port! Well, like I said before, Port won't be the rabble of 2011. And AFL is a surprising competition. And it's a prediction thread. So anyway, my main questions over the Dogs are:
Will Liam Jones be able to fill the hole left by Hall? My answer: Not until 2014.
Will Cooney and Lake specifically, as well as Higgins, Gilbee and Hargrave, able to return to close to best form? Lake-possible. Higgins-hasn't ever played to his potential, so yes. The others=no.
Will the Dogs be able to have a ruckman who is as able as Hudson was to bully the opposition around, as well as being quality? Not in 2012 for me.
+ they are a year older, and I think for the Doggies unfortunately it is a waiting game until their youth such as Wallis, Liberatore, Jones, Roughead, Cordy, Howard and Tutt are guns...window closed.

Well reasoned in your argument overall and you have placed the Dogs well down as a lot seem to have done without given any in depth as you have.

I approach the season with much more confidence on the Dogs, but we will know early if they are going to be competitive.

The one factor that nobody seems to really look at is the effect of the fixture and the Dogs get a very generous start with the first 5 games definitely winnable. If we only win 2 of those we will likely finish bottom 4 territory but if we snag 4 of them we can really challenge at the top end.

The benefit of confidence and momentum is that strong as evidenced by West Coast in 2011 and Freo in 2010.

If I find the time I will put some thoughts together on the overall picture based on the fixture. Fremantle are very well treated in that respect and I expect them to finish top 4.

 

[tigerfansince86]

Bombers fans give me the lulz.

 

[syl]

^^^

Useless post. From a Tigers fan?! No way...

 

[RandB]

Make of it what you will.

It's an interesting breakdown leading into the season ahead.

IMO strictly speaking if you are going to somehow link team lists to past performance (within a context of senior games experience) it is probably more accurate using the lists at the end of the final round - ie prior to trade week, delistings and drafts. Still a useful post though.

 

[Obeanie1]

For those of you who believe that experience relates to performance:

Make of it what you will.

So what you are saying is that to play more than 100 games of AFL you need to be a good player?

WOW! Ground breaking stuff that.

The most improvement in lists and players come when a decent group have younsters reach their 3rd>5th preseasons and 50>100 + games. It helps if they have a core group of gun older players with 100 > 150+ games experience to support them.

 

[GarnerSmash]

So what you are saying is that to play more than 100 games of AFL you need to be a good player?

WOW! Ground breaking stuff that.

I'm not saying anything, just providing data. But thanks for the feedback.

 

[Wernumberone]

That's pretty much 1 season for a young group because they wouldn't usually play every game. 1 season of fitness, size and experience more advanced

Had some time so thought, let's have a look and see what the actual average games played by 22 year and under players is.

Richmond 15.81
Essendon 16.73



You need a new argument as to why you will surpass us this year.

 

[tacopavlich]

The benefit of confidence and momentum is that strong as evidenced by West Coast in 2011 and Freo in 2010.

Difference being that both teams had been rebuilding for a few years and recieving high draft picks. Dogs are in a completely different situation.

 

[yeee_haaaa!!!!!]

Had some time so thought, let's have a look and see what the actual average games played by 22 year and under players is.

Richmond 15.81
Essendon 16.73



You need a new argument as to why you will surpass us this year.

3 reasons why richmond will be better than ess in 2012 - t cotchin d martin, b deledio

all of them better than any midfielder ess has on their list. and modern footy is more and more about depth of quality in the midfield

 

[HurleyTheFuture]

3 reasons why richmond will be better than ess in 2012 - t cotchin d martin, b deledio

all of them better than any midfielder ess has on their list. and modern footy is more and more about depth of quality in the midfield

hmmmmm, they had all those players in 2011 but finished 4 spots behind us... interesting, also Watson had a better 2011 than all of those, just sayin, not to say they wont turn out better

 

[I bleed Blue]

Dons will finish above Tigers this season.

 

[Rocky_Star_Pro]

3 reasons why richmond will be better than ess in 2012 - t cotchin d martin, b deledio

all of them better than any midfielder ess has on their list. and modern footy is more and more about depth of quality in the midfield

3 reasons as to why Essendon will be better than Richmond in 2012 - M. Hurley, D. Heppell, D. Zaharakis.

See, I can put three names down too and claim that's the reason as to why we will be better in 2012 than Richmond. Of course I haven't factored in depth of the list, potential injuries or improvement in the side, but neither have you!

 

[SouthSwans]

Re: 2011 Ladder Predictions - Part 2

1. Geelong
2. Collingwood
3. Carlton
4. Hawthorn
5. West Coast Eagles
6. Sydney Swans
7. North Melbourne
8. Fremantle
---------------
9. Essendon
10. Brisbane Lions
11. Richmond
12. St Kilda
13. Melbourne
14. Gold Coast Suns
15. Port Adelaide
16. Adelaide Crows
17. Western Bulldogs
18. GWS Giants

Brownlow: Sam Mitchell (Hawthorn)
Leigh Matthews Trophy: Chris Judd (Carlton)
Coleman: Jonathan Brown (Brisbane Lions)
Rising Star: Jed Lamb (Sydney Swans)

Premiers: Geelong
Runner Up: Hawthorn
Norm Smith: Joel Selwood

 

[Riders of Rohan]

Saints will still be a force next year imo if they can actually ****ing kick the ball to Riewoldt's chest. The lack of opportunities to score because they either kick way too far or way too short too him is absolutely ridiculous, even as a neutral fan it pisses me off.

 

[theboxmike]

3 reasons why richmond will be better than ess in 2012 - t cotchin d martin, b deledio

all of them better than any midfielder ess has on their list. and modern footy is more and more about depth of quality in the midfield

So your saying Martin is currently better than Watson? and going to be better in 2012?

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Saints will still be a force next year imo if they can actually ****ing kick the ball to Riewoldt's chest. The lack of opportunities to score because they either kick way too far or way too short too him is absolutely ridiculous, even as a neutral fan it pisses me off.

They won't be a force next year. Ross put them through boot camp and burned them out. Now Watters is going to take a couple of years to make his stamp and will probably focus on giving younger guys more responsibility.

Their bookends are awful - Kosi just plods on and they've lost Dawson who wasn't even that great. Will be an exciting year for Saints fans, but not a hugely successful one in my view.

A better year from Riewoldt and Goddard is important, but I can't see them getting much more out of Dal Santo, Fisher and Milne. Hayes will come back, but unfortunately midfielders can take a year or so to really get back to form after an ACL. If they play him through the midfield they miss out on the development of a younger midfielder. Balancing act.

The one I'm really interested in is Melbourne. They've got some great cattle, although a bit light through the middle. Seemed to be a sea of disunity and some awful performances show morale and confidence was shot. If Neeld can pull these guys together they'll upset some top teams. Don't see them taking part in the finals but they could definitely throw a spanner in the works.