- Dec 14, 2002
- 19,301
- 29,321
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Liverpool
Brady Rawlings?! Where did you pluck that one from KC? To be relevant we need to look to actual likely replacements, where the 'overall' gain could potentially come from (vs replacing a primarily offensive player with a predominantly defensive player.)Let's say we replace Boomer and Dal (including the latter because you did, didn't rate his year) with 2x Brady Rawlings.
Our midfield defensive pressure would go up 1000% but we'd in a huge scoring opportunity and inside 50 deficit to offset it.
What I'm saying is regardless of his limitations, it's near impossible to lose a player of Brent's calibre and come out with a net gain.
Let's say with the retirements of Boomer and Dal Santo we now have two of the following five more permanent fixtures in the best 22; Jed Anderson, Nathan Hrovat, Ryan Clarke, Ben Jacobs or Trent Dumont.
Lets say they average 6/10 offensively and 6/10 defensively, playing through the middle. Offensive rating based on things like metres gained, effective disposals, I50s, goals and goal assists, with the defensive rating based on tackles and 1%ers and holding better defensive positions around the stoppages or generally. I'm not being precise here, but trying to give a sense of it. So, assume the average overall or total rating is 12/20.
Now, let's say Boomer was 8/10 offensively and 2/10 defensively (10/20) and Dal 7/10 and 2/10 respectively (9/20). Their overall contribution is lower.
At the end of the day it'll be about goals kicked vs goals saved and it'd be a complex task to identify and value the different components, but I think your Rawlings example you're replacing a 8/2 with a 2/8, rather than a better all round example. In short, I can conceive of a total net gain. There may even be a certain synergy that comes with the replacements if they're all on, and see themselves as all on, the same level more or less. We may see more teamwork than reliance on the star factor.