-
LIVE: Sydney v Port Adelaide - 7:40 / 7:10 Fri
Squiggle tips Swans at 57% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
-
LIVE: Geelong v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Cats at 54% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Prelim Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round SF Winner: And_ROOS
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Which teams are most reliant on their top players?
- Thread starter Obeanie1
- Start date
- Tagged users None
A list of superstars you have there
- May 21, 2015
- 4,549
- 6,844
- AFL Club
- Richmond
What about Elliot, Moore and Dunn your VFL team must have sure missed them
All five of yours played in the preliminary final
Zero of ours played in the preliminary final
Compare the pair
- May 21, 2015
- 4,549
- 6,844
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Yet a fit Richmond flogged Collingwood twice last year before Collingwood fluked a win against a far superior side struck down with gastro (you know somethign that actually happened unlike Collingwood's "injuries")
- Banned
- #81
- Banned
- #82
A list of Premiership players you have there
- Oct 2, 2016
- 2,511
- 7,049
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
#tigershadgastro
The most pathetically hilarious excuse for finals failure in history.
- May 21, 2015
- 4,549
- 6,844
- AFL Club
- Richmond
#Maynardwasheld
You take the top 3 or 4 most crucial players out of any team and they drop away, I think do that to any finalist and they miss finals. Footy is very team oriented these days and the most crucial 4 players may not be the best 4 players but the most important to how the team functions. Seen it so often when they are taken away how big of an impact it has. Happened to Adelaide after the came runners up and they missed finals. Happened to Carlton and they went from 6 wins to 1 win. No team is going to do any good if you remove 3 or 4 of the most crucial players.
Some teams are better than others at covering the loss of a talented but not so crucial player and fringe players, that's where depth plays a part.
Some teams are better than others at covering the loss of a talented but not so crucial player and fringe players, that's where depth plays a part.
kaiserchief13
Hall of Famer
- Jul 12, 2011
- 35,204
- 26,039
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Eagles, Lakers, Bayern, Trojans
That's because Collingwood and Melbourne didn't have injuries to their top players
Sorry I can only give one like for this post.
Check out Richmond's recent results when Martin hasn't played (or played on one leg).
Think you're being a bit harsh on the coach though.
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
This thread is mostly nonsense in my view. There's no data just a lot if trolling.
What you can say I think us it's not West Coast or the Pies, because they did lose key players and played in the GF.
What you can say I think us it's not West Coast or the Pies, because they did lose key players and played in the GF.
How many players constitutes top players? Best 2? Best 6?
Best is not always most valuable either. I think it’s more important to keep your valuable players than your best in some circumstances.
For example with Richmond, before Lynch we would not have coped with losing Riewoldt for extended periods, nor Nankervis. Neither would be as good a player as Martin pound for pound, however they are much harder for us to replace.
The Eagles for example could cover losing Nic Nat quite easily because they have ruck depth, but I’m not sure they would have won the flag without McGovern. Yes they missed key players, but Kennedy, Shuey and McGovern are the Eagles best 3 players as neutral observer.
The Pies can cover midfielders quite easily, but there’d be an enormous drop off if someone like Howe and Grundy missed.
Take any teams best 3 players out though, and they will struggle. If those players happen to be in weak depth positions, it’s magnified.
Last edited:
- Jul 15, 2014
- 23,034
- 44,559
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea, LA Lakers, Western United
Yes they did. As an example, Melbourne had Viney spend a while on the sidelines and Collingwood had Treloar do both hamstrings. It is as if they did not have injuries though because their performance was not greatly affected. Yeah they did not really have injuries to Gawn and Grundy, which would be the ones that they probably cannot afford to lose, but I’d say every team in the competition has that player that is very important to their team.
- Jul 15, 2014
- 23,034
- 44,559
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea, LA Lakers, Western United
The fact that we are one of the more reliant teams on our top end players is a reasonable statement. However, the others outside of our 4 stars are not all average players.
It’s normal for a side that does not suffer many injuries to stars like Richmond to be severely affected when injuries do befall them. They don’t have much practice without them so it is a big loss. It doesn’t mean that their top players are the only good players though.
The reason why teams like Collingwood became so great at handling injuries is because they spent many years affected by them (it is one of the reasons Collingwood entered the top 8 only this year after having a decent list for a while). Richmond however did not. Our players are used to having stars like Martin and Riewoldt by their side. Doesn’t mean they themselves are average. A team with only 4 good players usually does not perform the way Richmond performed over the last two years. It’s just that the rest of the players need to have a lot of experience playing without them for that reliance to diminish like it diminished with Deledio (who we were more reliant on than anyone else on our list). That happens by either trading out a good player or having injuries.
- Jun 28, 2013
- 32,520
- 49,891
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Gunner is “seen more” when he plays forward. When he is thrown back it’s usually because we are lacking in the backline. He does well there as well.
So in a way you’re right - but not for the reasons you’re saying
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
I dont really agree about McGovern. I do agree he's the best defender in the game.
The back 6-7 are reactive to a large degree, and it is a lot about your weakest link. A player like McGovern can turn the initiative around to some extent with by putting himself in the right places at the right time though, and he is truly gifted in that regard.
Taking the first QTR of the GF as an example, with the Pies midfield so dominant they could target the matchups they wished. It then really becomes a group effort and guys like Hurn, Barass and Schofield have to stand up. One defender having a bad day opens a path to goal for the Magpies. De Goey getting on top of Buntine in the SF is a clear example of this.
The West Coast defence was brilliant in limiting the damage and keeping them in touch when they could easily have been blown away. McGovern certainly did his job with class, but it was a group effort.
For that reason I think they would cope with the loss of McGovern but any team would obviously much prefer not to have to do without the best defender in the game.
Pretty sure you can pick 2-3 players from each team. If you’re prepared to be savage, completely strip a tram of its key 2-3 backs, mids or forwards and it’ll have an impact. It all hinges on depth and the coach’s ability to not be reliant on 2-3 players specifically as part of their gameplan.
kaiserchief13
Hall of Famer
- Jul 12, 2011
- 35,204
- 26,039
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Eagles, Lakers, Bayern, Trojans
When Viney was out Melbournes midfield was ordinary vs good midfield. Treloar is Collingwoods 3rd or 4th best midfielder
We didn't have Tom McDonald until like round 7, Viney missed a bulk of the season and Hogan missed the last few weeks plus finals.
So there's that.
- Thread starter
- #97
Best player can be defined either by pure ability and then by their importance to the team.
If you are a teams best ruck and the next in line is an unproven kid then obviously that player is more important.
This is pretty much what is being discussed.
Which teams are more reliant on these players than others.
For the Pies it would be Grundy for example. He is an AA ruck and the next in line if he is out is not as accomplished.
Treloar was our best midfielder this season before his dual hammy tear. He was performing better than Pendles, Sidebottom, Adams and De Goey.
- Banned
- #99
Jack, Rance, Nankervis would have been more important than dusty the last couple years by this definition
Dusty has hardly missed a game since he was drafted
games starting, '18: 23, 25, 22, 23, 22, 23, 20, 22, 21
