Preview Changes: R6 2021 v Hawthorn in Tasmania

[Thylacinus]

Take aside Jiath, the Hawks defence is actually pretty experienced: Hardwick, Frost, Hartigan, Impey + Burgoyne often in there.

Tomorrow's Teams...
CROWS Avg Age 23.4, Avg Gms 57.8
HAWKS Avg Age 25.5, Avg Gms 106.6

Let's hope youthful exuberance wins the day!

Yeah, but just one in Burgoyne ups there average by heaps.

 

[Jack is Back]

Fair. Just seems like they're relying on younger players compared to us, as well as the average Hartigan/Frost

Firstly, I agree that average age and average games played is a poor measure of the youth and experience of a team (One Shaun Burgoyne can really boost those figures).

We have FOURTEEN players with less than 50 games played, Hawthorn have Eight. IMHO the number of sub-25 game players is a better measure. We have Ten, they have Three.

We are dominating the AFL in sub-50 and sub-25 game players this year. We are going for the World Record in playing KIDS this year. Reading the Adelaide Bigfooty Board it is not that obvious.

 

[1970crow]

My thinking is Tex is carrying a calf injury, so better playing him deep & Fog playing further up the ground.

Thilthorpe can float anywhere...

Depends on the injury though. It can be better to be higher up the ground playing a more roaming role. Deeper generally equals sharper movement which could be worse.

 

[FR0GGY]

Depends on the injury though. It can be better to be higher up the ground playing a more roaming role. Deeper generally equals sharper movement which could be worse.

Or we could rest him

 

[Johnny Rutten]

Firstly, I agree that average age and average games played is a poor measure of the youth and experience of a team (One Shaun Burgoyne can really boost those figures).

We have FOURTEEN players with less than 50 games played, Hawthorn have Eight. IMHO the number of sub-25 game players is a better measure. We have Ten, they have Three.

We are dominating the AFL in sub-50 and sub-25 game players this year. We are going for the World Record in playing KIDS this year. Reading the Adelaide Bigfooty Board it is not that obvious.

I agree 100%.

I use this method when evaluating a team's experience levels.

200+ Games = 5 points
100+ Games = 4 points
50+ Games = 3 points
25+ Games = 2 points
1+ Game = 1 point
0 Games = 0 points

Using the above... today's teams...

Hawks 67 points.... 4 x 200+, 6 x 100+, 4 x 50+, 3 x 25+, 5 x 1+.
Crows 45 points.... 1 x 200+, 4 x 100+, 2 x 50+, 4 x 25+, 10 x 1+, 1 x 0 gms.

We are easily the most inexperienced team this round...

85-Geel
77-Rich, Bris
74-WB
73-Carl
71-Melb
69-WC
67-Haw
66-StK, Frem
65-Port
63-Syd
57-Nth, Ess
56-Coll
55-GC
51-GWS
45-Adel

And, in terms of full squads...

111-StK
110-Geel
108-WC
107-Carl
105-WB
102-Syd
101-GC
100-Melb, Rich
98-Port
97-Bris
95-Frem
93-GWS
91-Nth, Haw, Ess
90-Coll
79-Adel

I think the above clearly shows how deep a rebuild we are going through, and how grateful we should be for three bloody wins on the board!!

 

[Crowbots are dead]

Yeah, but just one in Burgoyne ups there average by heaps.

It you remove him then average is 24.9. Still much older then us

 

[Burtonsgottago]

I agree 100%.

I use this method when evaluating a team's experience levels.

200+ Games = 5 points
100+ Games = 4 points
50+ Games = 3 points
25+ Games = 2 points
1+ Game = 1 point
0 Games = 0 points

Using the above... today's teams...

Hawks 67 points.... 4 x 200+, 6 x 100+, 4 x 50+, 3 x 25+, 5 x 1+.
Crows 45 points.... 1 x 200+, 4 x 100+, 2 x 50+, 4 x 25+, 10 x 1+, 1 x 0 gms.

We are easily the most inexperienced team this round...

85-Geel
77-Rich, Bris
74-WB
73-Carl
71-Melb
69-WC
67-Haw
66-StK, Frem
65-Port
63-Syd
57-Nth, Ess
56-Coll
55-GC
51-GWS
45-Adel

And, in terms of full squads...

111-StK
110-Geel
108-WC
107-Carl
105-WB
102-Syd
101-GC
100-Melb, Rich
98-Port
97-Bris
95-Frem
93-GWS
91-Nth, Haw, Ess
90-Coll
79-Adel

I think the above clearly shows how deep a rebuild we are going through, and how grateful we should be for three bloody wins on the board!!

A lot of time on your hands?

 

[1970crow]

According to afl.com.au

View attachment 1110683

The interns/algorithms that write this stuff obviously don't watch the games.

On the AFL site team lists it shows him as (omit). We know this to not be true but if that's all the info you had, it would be fairly described as shock call.

 

[Burtonsgottago]

Will this be another game where we bomb the ball into Hawthorn backlines and they run it out easily. I hope Nicks doesn't go anywhere the Pyke style plan.

Been doing it since the Gary Ayres days, why change?

 

[1970crow]

Dropping Lynch is a reasonable statement, and it needed to be made.

That says he's fit to play but he's not performed, good. Still could get some significant game time as the sub though.

If that's true, it's totally brilliant. I posted exactly that a week or so ago. It's his choice, he's either (omit) on form if his hand is up to play or (inj) if it's not. But him being sub is a bit confusing. Our coaches know he's injured, so what happens if someone does something early? They know he hasn't been able to train. I guess it's a dicey decision. Don't want a kid needing fitness to miss a game in the 2s but if there's a half a game at the highest level, you'd like that to go to a kid. Probably better the way they've gone if it's not a kid in that role. But then I'd prefer Mackay so Lynch gets right and there should be consistency.

 

[Burtonsgottago]

Why is everyone saying we’ve gone too tall? Haven’t we replaced like for like?

Berg for Billy
RT for Lynch - taller yes but also super mobile
Hately for Berry

Fog to again play some midfield minutes
Not playing all four talls inside the F50 at the same time - as we haven’t done in previous weeks, instead rotating them

What am I missing?

Agree. Height is not the issue. Agility is. Tall and agile is not a problem.

 

[Johnny Rutten]

A lot of time on your hands?

Actually, that was one click of a button. I work with databases, so I may have a little hobby AFL one on the side. Don't tell my boss.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Why is everyone saying we’ve gone too tall? Haven’t we replaced like for like?

We have but we were too tall last week as well

Still, it's a small price to pay to see both Fogarty and Thilthorpe included

 

[1970crow]

Or we could rest him

You try telling...... I'd prefer he rested, TT, Tex, Fog and Berg is a very poor structure. What it guarantees is very very few repeat entries. These are generally more conducive to scoring because the opposition normally haven't completely re-set their structure. Turning the ball back over in our D50 isn't the best result for our forwards. So they'll do it tough today you'd think.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Firstly, I agree that average age and average games played is a poor measure of the youth and experience of a team (One Shaun Burgoyne can really boost those figures).

We have FOURTEEN players with less than 50 games played, Hawthorn have Eight. IMHO the number of sub-25 game players is a better measure. We have Ten, they have Three.

We are dominating the AFL in sub-50 and sub-25 game players this year. We are going for the World Record in playing KIDS this year. Reading the Adelaide Bigfooty Board it is not that obvious.

Across the field I totally agree. We’re consistently putting out the youngest side in the comp IMO

In defence, my thoughts were just that our experienced heads (Smith, Doedee, Brown) are better than theirs (Impey, Hartigan, Frost, Hardwick), hence my use of ‘reliance’. Their better defenders are the younger Scrimshaw/Jiath

 

[GreyCrow]

We are dominating the AFL in sub-50 and sub-25 game players this year. We are going for the World Record in playing KIDS this year. Reading the Adelaide Bigfooty Board it is not that obvious.

I think the above clearly shows how deep a rebuild we are going through, and how grateful we should be for three bloody wins on the board!!

1. The wins are very nice indeed
2. It is very obvious we are playing a lot of kids

The point missed is nobody has ever said we arent playing enough kids - but that we were sacrificing opportunities to play more while senior players are injured

Worrell could have come in for Kelly (agreed Kelly stood up - kudos to him) Thilthorpe OR Himmelberg could have come in for Frampton or Walker or both. A fence post could have come in for Lynch and Jones for McAdam

But we played 3 injured players and a clunker BECAUSE we cared about winning over development - but ''selection integrity'' means a player must dominate SANFL rather than give them a chance based on why we drafted them

Just keep running those lines Chayce and one day this can be yours

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Or we could rest him

Perhaps they don't want to rest Lynch & Tex at the same time... & they are taking in turns to keep some experience in the forward line.

 

[hey shorty]

Perhaps they don't want to rest Lynch & Tex at the same time... & they are taking in turns to keep some experience in the forward line.

If its true and Tex got through the whole main session theres no need to rest him.

But I wouldnt take him to Perth

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

If its true and Tex got through the whole main session theres no need to rest him.

But I wouldnt take him to Perth

Yes, Tex got through normal training, but Lynch hasn't for weeks, so makes sense to rest Lynch to get his toe right... then manage Tex later if need be

 

[Jinglebells32]

Why would you have a red glacier as the sub?

I'm sure Lynch must have slept with your GF. He's been stuck in your head for years.

 

[Pilchard_Adams]

Firstly, I agree that average age and average games played is a poor measure of the youth and experience of a team (One Shaun Burgoyne can really boost those figures).

We have FOURTEEN players with less than 50 games played, Hawthorn have Eight. IMHO the number of sub-25 game players is a better measure. We have Ten, they have Three.

We are dominating the AFL in sub-50 and sub-25 game players this year. We are going for the World Record in playing KIDS this year. Reading the Adelaide Bigfooty Board it is not that obvious.

14 Sub 50 game players! Jeez even Gold Coast only had 12 in their first ever AFL game. Giants beat us though, they had 18 sub 50 game players

 

[Pilchard_Adams]

I agree 100%.

I use this method when evaluating a team's experience levels.

200+ Games = 5 points
100+ Games = 4 points
50+ Games = 3 points
25+ Games = 2 points
1+ Game = 1 point
0 Games = 0 points

Using the above... today's teams...

Hawks 67 points.... 4 x 200+, 6 x 100+, 4 x 50+, 3 x 25+, 5 x 1+.
Crows 45 points.... 1 x 200+, 4 x 100+, 2 x 50+, 4 x 25+, 10 x 1+, 1 x 0 gms.

We are easily the most inexperienced team this round...

85-Geel
77-Rich, Bris
74-WB
73-Carl
71-Melb
69-WC
67-Haw
66-StK, Frem
65-Port
63-Syd
57-Nth, Ess
56-Coll
55-GC
51-GWS
45-Adel

And, in terms of full squads...

111-StK
110-Geel
108-WC
107-Carl
105-WB
102-Syd
101-GC
100-Melb, Rich
98-Port
97-Bris
95-Frem
93-GWS
91-Nth, Haw, Ess
90-Coll
79-Adel

I think the above clearly shows how deep a rebuild we are going through, and how grateful we should be for three bloody wins on the board!!

Great summary. I dont see it changing next season when MacKay is gone, Lynch likely gone, Tex, Crouch, Talia and Seed uncontracted

 

[slice]

I'm sure Lynch must have slept with your GF. He's been stuck in your head for years.

2 years. The same length of time he’s been terrible.

But, regardless, why would you have the slowest non-ruck in the AFL as the sub? Especially when he’s supposedly injured?

If we have to have a medical sub, at least use it strategically and have someone that can add pace/versatility if they have to enter the game. Absurd to have a liability as the sub.

 

[Pilchard_Adams]

1. The wins are very nice indeed
2. It is very obvious we are playing a lot of kids

The point missed is nobody has ever said we arent playing enough kids - but that we were sacrificing opportunities to play more while senior players are injured

Worrell could have come in for Kelly (agreed Kelly stood up - kudos to him) Thilthorpe OR Himmelberg could have come in for Frampton or Walker or both. A fence post could have come in for Lynch and Jones for McAdam

But we played 3 injured players and a clunker BECAUSE we cared about winning over development - but ''selection integrity'' means a player must dominate SANFL rather than give them a chance based on why we drafted them

Just keep running those lines Chayce and one day this can be yours

The only one I would agree with would be Lynch, he couldnt run. Frampton and any other inexperienced player deserves a block of games to show something. That is development. Trial matches, Geelong and yesterdays SANFL game suggest he could make it. The 4 games between suggest he cant. He has shown more than Jones ever has, Jones has been given blocks of games and not shown much at all. Part of development is the practical side of things, having players like Tex, Talia, Lynch, Laird, Smith on field helps in development too.

 

[Jinglebells32]

2 years. The same length of time he’s been terrible.

But, regardless, why would you have the slowest non-ruck in the AFL as the sub? Especially when he’s supposedly injured?

If we have to have a medical sub, at least use it strategically and have someone that can add pace/versatility if they have to enter the game. Absurd to have a liability as the sub.

I think we are hoping he doesn't need to come on. We didn't want anyone not getting a run in the SANFL after both Hately & Murray missed out on a game last week. If he has to get subbed on, he'll still be handy.