Tadhg Kennelly 2nd most important Swan.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by mocaholic
Is it just me or is she bizarrely attractive? reminds me of the Viz mag's "Borderline Boilers: Your eyes say no, but your nuts say GO".

Yes (it's just you).

[ScottH]

Originally posted by Agent 86
Yes (it's just you).

Yep.

[Tuesday]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Hall is clearly far and away #1

Thug.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Hall is clearly far and away #1.

We've often won when Baz has had little impact.

In previous years I might have said Ball as we struggled whenever he was out. And we'll struggle this year unless someone steps up.

Then again, Baz is pretty awesome & usually has to contend with 2 defenders climbing all over him.

[liz]

Originally posted by Agent 86
We've often won when Baz has had little impact.

True but

a) that doesn't mean he's not clearly the most important player. He is one for whom there is no substitute and over the long term it would be hardest to cover for. Also there must be a higher correlation between Hall having blinder and the Swans winning than any othe single player having a blinder and the Swans winning; and

b) Hall's impact goes beyond the number of times he touches the ball or even the goals he scores. Just having him on the ground provides a target for the Swans, a focus for the opposition defence, and is core to the structure of the whole team.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by liz
True but...

I'm not really disputing Baz's importance. Just the extent by which "Hall is clearly far and away #1". He's our best forward & probably the best in the AFL. But it all comes to nothing when he's not getting the service he deserves. My point being: the best doesn't always mean the most important.

...Also there must be a higher correlation between Hall having blinder and the Swans winning than any othe single player having a blinder and the Swans winning

True but - for Baz to have a blinder, there's gotta be a number of other players having one too. He can make goals from nothing through sheer strength, but most are from good delivery.

Hall's impact goes beyond the number of times he touches the ball or even the goals he scores.

True again, but we have other players whose importance is not just measured by the stats.

I guess what I'm getting to is that we're not gonna win the bigger games whilst we're losing hitouts 2:1. And Baz isn't going to help if he needs to come halfway up the ground to get a kick.

[liz]

Originally posted by Agent 86

I guess what I'm getting to is that we're not gonna win the bigger games whilst we're losing hitouts 2:1.

I think hitouts is one of the most over-rated stats. Often meaningless who gets their hands to the ball first if it isn't tapped to advantage. And skilled midfielders can rove to their own or the opposition ruckman.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by liz
I think hitouts is one of the most over-rated stats. Often meaningless who gets their hands to the ball first if it isn't tapped to advantage. And skilled midfielders can rove to their own or the opposition ruckman.

Yeah but, no but... it's often a lottery, but a skilled ruckman combined with skilled onballers over time will do better. 2 of the most important goals in the final series scored from a single controlled tap to a running player.

[TheHood]

I would say Crouchy is the 2nd most important player, however it's a baseless call because we haven't played a game without him for 7 or 8 years.

[wheels27]

The fact that none of us can decide between these similar type players, suggests to me that we can cover them.

I would have thought, as previously mentioned, that ruckmen are most important, so therefore Jolly.

Just think without him, Chambers is no.1 ruck.

Jolly's absence would, I think, have the greatest impact on how we play.

[dendol]

Originally posted by wheels27
The fact that none of us can decide between these similar type players, suggests to me that we can cover them.

I would have thought, as previously mentioned, that ruckmen are most important, so therefore Jolly.

Just think without him, Chambers is no.1 ruck.

Jolly's absence would, I think, have the greatest impact on how we play.

Not neccessarily in the negative way you assume. Chambers can take the centre bounce and Goodes will take the stoppages around the ground. We'd then have a dual Brownlow medalist to go with the premiership cup in 2006.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by dendol
Not neccessarily in the negative way you assume. Chambers can take the centre bounce and Goodes will take the stoppages around the ground. We'd then have a dual Brownlow medalist to go with the premiership cup in 2006.

I'm not sure if I wanna see Goodes having to go through that again.

Baz does a great job with it up forward but we need another option elsewhere.

[dendol]

Originally posted by Agent 86
I'm not sure if I wanna see Goodes having to go through that again.

Yeah, seeing him win a Brownlow was painful wasn't it..

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by dendol
Yeah, seeing him win a Brownlow was painful wasn't it..

No, that bit was good. But half expecting his knees to crumple at every ruck contest was torture.

[dendol]

Originally posted by Agent 86
No, that bit was good. But half expecting his knees to crumple at every ruck contest was torture.

That was due to the impact of taking centre bounces. Like I suggested earlier, Chambers to contest those and Goodes to ruck around the ground if Jolly was to get injured.

Besides, they've put the ruck circle in now to try to limit the damage (not sure how successful it has been though).