Virgin Blue wrote:
Michael Jezz wrote:
I agree with Sheehan. I think Trengove, Scully, Gysberts show more in their first season than Gibbs, Murphy, Kreuzer did in theirs. We can still improve our list in future drafts but my concern is our window is open for the next 4 years, while Judd is at his peak. Melbourne looks like they could contend within in 2 years and there Window is open for a decade. Anyway, this is all based on speculation and gut feeling but I think his article is more analytical than biased. I also remember Sheehan being pro Carlton in late 2007. I still think we are a key position player short at both ends and at least one A grade midfielder (to ease the pressure on Judd). Melbourne look only to be missing a key forward---if Watts develops, maybe 2 if he doesn't.
I remember an article early in Murphy's career comparing his first year to Judd.
And pls show me another first yr ruck who did as well as Kruez.
I think people have forgotten how good Murph's first 12 games were before he got injured. He was tagged from about his third game.
I think Sheehan is missing the comparative depth of the two lists. We've got very few on-field flaws now, and guys queing up to play seniors. Whilst Melbourne is putting together a reasonable senior team with some clear areas of strength, it still has holes and they will have very little capacity to fix those, or build the sort of depth we already have, over the next several drafts. I think they'll end up a lot like the Melbourne sides of early last decade, up and down like a yoyo because they don't have sufficient depth to cover their injuries. They are much better placed than Richmond, but their time in the sun is still many years away IMO.
Login
Register
FAQ
16-14
