Steve_C7 wrote:
gerry atric wrote:
Steve wrote:
Yes the Hawks side was a class above our side, but lets not forget that theirs was pretty much their best side, our was a very inexperienced side and certainly not our best.
I don't know Steve, I reckon the Hawks had a few outs too. We were missing Judd, Walks, Fish, Setanta. They were missing Roughhead, Crawford, Sewell, Croad, and Franklin played for about 30 minutes. Apart from Judd, and he is a gun, I think the Hawks were as below strength as us.
Fair call, but not the point I was making. How many of thier players have played less than 15 games versus the number of players that we had that have played <15 games?
Because we don't have the depth of talent that they do, the few players that weren't in our side hurts us more than the few they were missing. This is a problem that Pagan has left us in not giving enough oppertunity in the young players and standing by them when they were given an oppertunity.
We were missing Roughead, Ladson, Crawford, Sewell, Guerra and Croad from our best 22. Then there's guys like Bailey, Thorp and Dew who we would expect to be well and truly entrenched in the side by season's end. Also, one cannot ignore the fact that Mitchell and Franklin barely played a minute after 1/4 time.
As for players having played <15 games, I calculate it as 11 each of those who played on Saturday night.
Carlton: Kreuzer, Grigg, Bower, Austin, Hampson, Armfield, Pfeiffer, Edwards, Jackson, Jamison, Ellard
Hawthorn: Muston, Tuck, Dawson, Moss, Murphy, Ellis, Rioli, Renouf, Morton, Kennedy, Stokes
So I'm not sure if and how that helps your point, but I agree that you're a couple of years off from having adequate depth. If guys like Judd, Stevens, Murphy or Fevola go down, you struggle. Clearly you have some quality coming through but, in my opionion, anyone talking about a top 8 finish in 2008 is being quite unrealistic.