Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Poll

Who is the best 5 bench players to go with the existing lineup below?

*** currently vacant
*****Backline group*****2 - Lachie Cowan
3 - Jesse Motlop
4 - Oliver Hollands
*****Midfield group*****5 - Adam Cerra
*****Forwards group*****6 - Zac Williams
*****Midfield group*****7 - Jagga Smith
8 - Lachie Fogarty
*****Midfield group*****9 - Patrick Cripps
*****Forwards group*****10 - Harry McKay
11 - Mitch McGovern
*****Forwards group*****12 - Ben Ainsworth
13 - Blake Acres
14 - Ollie Florent
15 - Billy Wilson
16 - Ben Camporeale
*****Forwards group*****17 - Brodie Kemp
*****Midfield group*****18 - Sam Walsh
*****Forwards group*****19 - Will Hayward
***20 - Elijah Hollands - currently not on our list
21 - Lucas Camporeale
*****Backline group*****22 - Harry O'Farrell
*****Backline group*****23 - Jacob Weitering
*****Backline group*****24 - Nick Newman
25 - Liam Reidy
*****Backline group*****26 - Nick Haynes
*****Midfield group*****27 - Marc Pittonet
28 - Harry Charleson
*****Midfield group*****29 - George Hewitt
30 - Jack Ison
31 - Campbell Chesser
32 - Matthew Carroll
33 - Lewis Young
34 - Rob Monahan
35 - Harry Dean
36 - Cooper Lord
37 - Jordan Boyd
***38 - Will White - currently not on our list
39 - Talor Byrne
40 - Hudson O'Keeffe
41 - Matt Duffy
*****Backline group*****42 - Adam Saad
*****Forwards group*****43 - Ashton Moir
44 - Francis Evans
45 - Flynn Young
46 - Matt Cottrell
Topic: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench (Read 3190 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #45 –
I'll be curious to see how the Swans fit McLean, McDonald, Amartey and Curnow into the forward line. Maybe a new roles for one of them.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #46 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: Thryleon – on
How can you measure a players Average output?

I.e.  Hayward?  His formline stacks up over 3 years.  Florent was sidelined by his coach, not his ability.  So not sure its fair to do that with him, and Ainsworth had a solid year. 

We are saying all these guys have to do is back up 2025 form, vs the outgoings 2025 form.  Thats 11 games without being subbed off injured for JSOS.

Charlie went bog average by key forward standards.  18 games for 32 goals.  1.8 goals a game.  Sure he kicked 27 behinds, but we wont miss those.  All we need is Kemp to chime in for 18 games and kick 30.  That will cover Charlie.  Hayward and Ainsworth might make up the rest, if Kemp falls short, and Skull is a wildcard here.  Played 5 games, kicked 3 goals.

TDK the ruckman is more of a unicorn than not.  Thing is, you yourself @kruddler  have stated that Pittonet shades him.  So if Pittonet Shades him, TDK's 2025 was a mixed bag, where he was generally good for half the season and then came back to the field.  Rucks are easier to cover, you just need a competitor.  I.e.  Is Cameron a better ruck than Grundy?  Probably not.  Cameron has played better footy than Grundy more often.  Collingwood didnt miss him.  Maybe we will have Pittonet finally have a consistent run.

JSOS.  I love the guy.  Is a competitor, hates being beaten.  Thing is, he played 13 games, and missed 2024 completely.  He was also not present for most of our best footy in 2023, and hasnt even played a final yet for us.  Are we really going to pine about that now? 

It reeks of agenda.  What happened to being measured?

For those of us on my side of the fence, we are fighting off people like yourself who can't seem to agree on where the issues are (or aren't)

I've been arguing about rucks for years and didn;t get many an ally in any of it.
Now it seems 'everyone agrees with me' and are using my arguments as if they were their own. You can't have it both ways.
I'm not rehashing years worth of arguments about those 2.

Going back to the heart of the matter....how do you measure average?

Let me try and explain with the 'olympic scoring' method.
Take out the best and the worst and work with whats left.
So ignore charlies injury year. Take out his best coleman year. Work with whats left. Pretty consistent and consistently above anything we got in.
Using the same logic with Hayward. Take out his 41 goal year and his best was 34 goals. If Charlies worst year last year was 32.
So who is better?


ive said what I've we said about this. 

Average.

Let's play that game.  Charlie has played 9 seasons.

2025 was actually his 4th best season of his career based on goals per game.

Thats right, he's only kicked more than 35 goals in a season 3 times.

https://afltables.com/afl/stats/players/C/Charlie_Curnow.html

Absurd is actually asserting anything.  Most of us are looking at what we got last season, and what we could have this season.

Best leave jack out of the discussion if you're going to use averages.

Tdk too.  100 games in navy.  Less than half of them worth his pay check.

I get what you're trying to say but this is pointless because we wont know what its going to end up like for 4 months.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #47 –
Swans will sort it easily.... Chuck the betrayer straight to FF, and the spuds will play in the twos, be traded out or culled. 
DrE is no more... you ok with that harmonica man?

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #48 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
I'll be curious to see how the Swans fit McLean, McDonald, Amartey and Curnow into the forward line. Maybe a new roles for one of them.

Amartey can play in defence, and he missed most of last season with an adductor strain.  As we know with Jack Silvagni, adductor strains can be chronic, even after surgery.
"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #49 –
Quote from: madbluboy – on
I get the positive thinking
If Walsh us fit
If Cripps gets back to 24 form
If Newman is still the same
If Harry has no issues
If Acres can get back to his best
If Dean can play a role straight away
If Jagga can have an immediate impact
If Florent can play like he did before the big bad Cox got to him.
If Kemp can stay fit.
If motlop and Ainsworth can take the next step.
If Cottrell doesn't get injured.

Lots of ifs.

Meanwhile Gulden thinks charlie is just like Buddy.

Funny how most of that list had an injury last year and everyone is positive about them.
The 3 that left, who all had injuries as well are never going to get back to the same standard though.
This is the 'logic' that others are failing to see.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #50 –
Quote from: DJC – on
Amartey can play in defence, and he missed most of last season with an adductor strain.  As we know with Jack Silvagni, adductor strains can be chronic, even after surgery.

I guess so. I am quite clearly a Charlie fan, but I can't quite follow the Swans' logic. They already have a trio of decent tall forwards, and having quickly looked at AFL Tables, they had less I50's, Marks I50, clearances, and tackles than us in 2025 (a few other statistical categories were also in our favour). This is undoubtedly a cursory, superficial examination, but I can't help feeling their bigger issues lie elsewhere, and getting Charlie was just talent for the sake of talent, and they paid a lot to get him IMO. Maybe they will offload some of the others next season.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #51 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: madbluboy – on
I get the positive thinking
If Walsh us fit
If Cripps gets back to 24 form
If Newman is still the same
If Harry has no issues
If Acres can get back to his best
If Dean can play a role straight away
If Jagga can have an immediate impact
If Florent can play like he did before the big bad Cox got to him.
If Kemp can stay fit.
If motlop and Ainsworth can take the next step.
If Cottrell doesn't get injured.

Lots of ifs.

Meanwhile Gulden thinks charlie is just like Buddy.

Funny how most of that list had an injury last year and everyone is positive about them.
The 3 that left, who all had injuries as well are never going to get back to the same standard though.
This is the 'logic' that others are failing to see.


Here's the thing though.
Are people actually saying that or is that the swing you're putting on it from the comments?
It's not 'logic' if it's not real.
I certainly don't believe it.
And any comment along those lines would only have been made in the context of their 2025 output and limitations.

Charlie had an interrupted pre-season last year...I suspect his knee will continue to give him some trouble but if he can have a good pre-season and stay relatively fit he's still capable of kicking a lot of goals. I reckon Sydney will suit him.
Tom is just getting to the sweet spot in his career. If he can deliver on that potential we may see waht we've always hoped he'd provide for us.
Jack is a concern because he has a history of missing chunks of a season and he'll also be weighed down a bit (as I suspect he has been this year) by external factors.

On the other side of the coin...
Newman being older may find that his time off has impacted a lot more than someone like Jagga.
Acres is held together by sticky tape.
Walsh is a key player for us but I can think of at least two occasions when he was playing super football only to be injured...If he can have a fully fit season it will be a big boost....But, will he be distracted, as I suspect Tom was at times, by big offers from other clubs.
We have to accept that wear and tear will eventually catch up with Cripps and a lot will depend on the progress of our young mids like Lord and Ben Camporeale
Hayward, Ainsworth, Florent, Chesser, Reidy...how many games will they play. How will they gel.
Are Dean and Ison ready to go or will it take some time for them to be given an opportunity.
And what of the coach...if things go wrong in the first half of the season we could be changing things up all over again

You see the whole thing is up in the air and there are reasons for both optimism and pessimism
We don't know how it will play out, but making definite predictions is really silly.
I know which forecast is the brighter one, but I don't think anyone is unaware that next year may present its own significant challenges.


Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #52 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
Quote from: DJC – on
Amartey can play in defence, and he missed most of last season with an adductor strain.  As we know with Jack Silvagni, adductor strains can be chronic, even after surgery.

I guess so. I am quite clearly a Charlie fan, but I can't quite follow the Swans' logic. They already have a trio of decent tall forwards, and having quickly looked at AFL Tables, they had less I50's, Marks I50, clearances, and tackles than us in 2025 (a few other statistical categories were also in our favour). This is undoubtedly a cursory, superficial examination, but I can't help feeling their bigger issues lie elsewhere, and getting Charlie was just talent for the sake of talent, and they paid a lot to get him IMO. Maybe they will offload some of the others next season.

See what you've done there is highlighted our issues, not there's.
Despite swans having less of what you described, they also scored more points than us. You've highlighted or inability to hit a target inside 50 and take a mark inside 50 (and thus score)

Given the change of charlie, that gap may increase

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #53 –
Lods...
When asked why we will improve by those who think we can, everyone is fit, everyone is their best version of themselves. Everyone who was good last year remains good. Everyone who had potential fulfils it. No key players will get injured.

That's the issue i have.

Reality is closer to what you said there and what I've been saying. You cant say we'll be better because Newman well be back. We might be better, but he might be worse... if he is back at all.
Rinse repeat for anyone on our list.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #54 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Lods...
When asked why we will improve by those who think we can, everyone is fit, everyone is their best version of themselves. Everyone who was good last year remains good. Everyone who had potential fulfils it. No key players will get injured.

That's the issue i have.

Reality is closer to what you said there and what I've been saying. You cant say we'll be better because Newman well be back. We might be better, but he might be worse... if he is back at all.
Rinse repeat for anyone on our list.

I think what you're seeing though is posters are making the argument for a positive outcome...but by no means completely oblivious to the problems that may lie ahead.
Because they don't mention it doesn't mean they don't recognise them.

Much the same as the other side are presenting reasons why we will struggle but giving much less emphasis to any positives

We all realise we'll need luck with injury and luck in general.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #55 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: PaulP – on


I guess so. I am quite clearly a Charlie fan, but I can't quite follow the Swans' logic. They already have a trio of decent tall forwards, and having quickly looked at AFL Tables, they had less I50's, Marks I50, clearances, and tackles than us in 2025 (a few other statistical categories were also in our favour). This is undoubtedly a cursory, superficial examination, but I can't help feeling their bigger issues lie elsewhere, and getting Charlie was just talent for the sake of talent, and they paid a lot to get him IMO. Maybe they will offload some of the others next season.

See what you've done there is highlighted our issues, not there's.
Despite swans having less of what you described, they also scored more points than us. You've highlighted or inability to hit a target inside 50 and take a mark inside 50 (and thus score)

Given the change of charlie, that gap may increase

On the other hand we've added to our options for scoring. Whether our efficiency into, and while in the 50 will also improve is yet to be determined.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #56 –
Quote from: Lods – on
Quote from: kruddler – on
Lods...
When asked why we will improve by those who think we can, everyone is fit, everyone is their best version of themselves. Everyone who was good last year remains good. Everyone who had potential fulfils it. No key players will get injured.

That's the issue i have.

Reality is closer to what you said there and what I've been saying. You cant say we'll be better because Newman well be back. We might be better, but he might be worse... if he is back at all.
Rinse repeat for anyone on our list.

I think what you're seeing though is posters are making the argument for a positive outcome...but by no means completely oblivious to the problems that may lie ahead.
Because they don't mention it doesn't mean they don't recognise them.

Much the same as the other side are presenting reasons why we will struggle but giving much less emphasis to any positives

We all realise we'll need luck with injury and luck in general.

The problem is there are too many different posters who are making slightly different arguments. so you say people ar enot saying this...maybe, but a person is at least.

Its not worth going over everything from every poster.

You see my point in that there are issues with the 'improvement' theory as it ignores people going backwards and injuries. No 'pro improvement' argument or 'cover' argument takes that into account....or severly underestimates its impact.
Look at what it did to our team this year and last.

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #57 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: PaulP – on


I guess so. I am quite clearly a Charlie fan, but I can't quite follow the Swans' logic. They already have a trio of decent tall forwards, and having quickly looked at AFL Tables, they had less I50's, Marks I50, clearances, and tackles than us in 2025 (a few other statistical categories were also in our favour). This is undoubtedly a cursory, superficial examination, but I can't help feeling their bigger issues lie elsewhere, and getting Charlie was just talent for the sake of talent, and they paid a lot to get him IMO. Maybe they will offload some of the others next season.

See what you've done there is highlighted our issues, not there's.
Despite swans having less of what you described, they also scored more points than us. You've highlighted or inability to hit a target inside 50 and take a mark inside 50 (and thus score)

Given the change of charlie, that gap may increase

I think that the opposite will be true.  Charlie kicked 32.27 and heaps more that didn't register.  Those misses all provide the opposition with rebound opportunities that put our team defence under pressure.  Having forwards that make the most of their opportunities will improve our scoring and reduce the pressure on our defence. 

For comparison, Harry kicked 22.10 last season, Hayward kicked 29.10 and Ainsworth managed 23.14.

Then there's the focus our list managers had on better ball users.  Fortunately, they know what they're doing  :)



"Negative waves are not helpful. Try saying something righteous and hopeful instead." Oddball

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #58 –
Quote from: DJC – on
Then there's the focus our list managers had on better ball users.  Fortunately, they know what they're doing :)
Talk about opinion with no facts.

Especially when you compare this with Sydney, who DO know what they are doing as they are one of the most successful teams of the past 2 decades.
 

Re: Pick our team in parts - Part 4 - 5 on the bench

Reply #59 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
You see my point in that there are issues with the 'improvement' theory as it ignores people going backwards and injuries. No 'pro improvement' argument or 'cover' argument takes that into account....or severly underestimates its impact.
Look at what it did to our team this year and last.

There's the logic you're looking for though.

The improvement theory is dependent on more postives 'coming in than going out'
Nobody would possibly suggest we won't be hit by injuries in 2026.
Some unexpected
Some long term.

The thing is to improve, we must have more positves coming in to combat the talent going out, if we are to be better in 2026 than 2025.
But here's the 'key'
We don't have to match TDK, Curnow and Silvagni at their best.
We only have to cover their 2025 output to be better.
At their best it's a huge challenge
At their 2025 best, especially Curnow, the challenge is not as great.

The reason for a bit of positivity?
The injury sutuation the last two years has been something else, and in 2025 it was exacerbated by a range of other challenges (mental health, division, players being offered huge money elsewhere.)
The injury situation matched some of our more critical times over the last 2025 years (2002, 2014)
It's possible we'll be hit hard again, but to have that type of turmoil three years in a row would suggest it's probably nothing within the range of mortals to fix, but rather a job for a 'witch doctor'.