Since somehow nailing a ladder prediction in 2010 by getting the seven of the top eight teams correct, my last four seasons of ladder predictions have been deplorable.
At one point I had Melbourne as a top-six team. I had North Melbourne as a top-four team long before they had even played finals under Brad Scott. For the past three seasons I have written the Cats off. Even last year I was ridiculously high on Fremantle while being way low on Port Adelaide.
Topping off the horrid of all horrid season predictions, I may have even had Carlton as a top-four contender in 2014 – the prime example of how out of touch I have been.
So with the AFL modifying their strategy on fixtures in the past two seasons to a pool system, my ladder prediction is going to modify along with it, and over the next week you will get my ladder pools for 2015. Today we start at the foot of the table with teams in the pool 13-18.
This pre-season there has only been three teams whose language is of a club in the midst of a rebuild and who are essentially warning their fans not to expect wins in 2014. St Kilda were last year’s wooden spoon side and despite coach Alan Richardson forecasting a more attacking and more daring Saints, this is still a team that lacks class and experience.
The names on the St Kilda list speaks of the current position of the club. This is a group of young prospective stars being held together by a couple of timeless veterans who are true stalwarts of the club. There is enough promise in this young list and enough wisdom on those old heads that St Kilda will cause a couple of upsets this year, just as they did last year. But those upsets will be punctuated by longer passages where the team battles to find the consistency that the best teams have.
As for the other two teams that are using language usually associated with a list rebuild, Western Bulldogs and Melbourne are in a bit of an unknown position in terms of their rebuild.
The Western Bulldogs had appeared to make strides over the past few seasons, but the 2014-15 off-season saw a wholesale shakeup of both the playing list and coaching group. Like a number of the clubs who have missed finals over the past few seasons, there are budding superstars on the list, but a real lack of veteran experience and consistency from the young bright spots means a bottom-end ladder position should be expected.
As for Melbourne some recent additions to the list may mean that the club has advanced further than many experts are forecasting. Given that this was a club that produced one of the worst attacking seasons in nearly a century, the reasons to be pessimistic are front of mind or forward of the ball. But through some shrewd investment in giving that forward line some potency, this is a team that will cause an upset or two.
If the club embraces a more positive game plan and gets some good luck on the injury front they could finish a lot closer to 13 than 18.
With three taken care of, the final three groups of the bottom pool are tougher to predict. Indeed in all examples it is about looking at the red flags. And none are bigger than impending ASADA sanctions to a large number of Essendon players.
If these sanctions are to stretch for a full season then Essendon are likely the AFL’s frontrunner for the wooden spoon. Even if the sanctions only effect a chunk of the season, it could be enough to derail the 2015 campaign.
There is so much uncertainty behind Essendon and the only thing that can really be guaranteed is that speculation will remain through their season. The club has held strong over two tough years and at some point there needs to be a breaking point. 2015 could be that breaking point.
Victorian clubs now occupy four of the six bottom pool spots, it seems only fair that in a national competition that interstate clubs join this Victorian core four, and two stand out, Adelaide and Brisbane.
Both are likely going to be considered controversial selections, particularly with the clubs own fans, but this is about the evenness of the competition in general. Truly there are 14 contenders for this year’s finals but only 8 will make it. Two will be end up as bottom six teams even though that doesn’t do justice to their talent.
When talking about Adelaide of the past five years, the inclination is to speak of 2012, where they were a kick away from a grand final. Experts consider this the real Adelaide Crows team. But look at the past five years of Adelaide finishes – 10th, 11th, third, 14th and 11th – and there is an outlier: 2012. Any one of the other four years should be seen as the real Adelaide Crows.
For some reason there is a perception the youth at Adelaide is stronger than the likes of Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney. They have lost players though and the ongoing story for Adelaide is going to be off-field as contract debate swirls. A new hard-line approach by a new coach could pay dividends in the long run, but there could be short-term pain.
As for Brisbane, the hype is on a series of high-profile recruits that have built a dominant midfield group. But the true great teams from recent years are complemented with outstanding backlines and strong key forward prospects. Brisbane are still someway from establishing this.
Adelaide, Brisbane, Essendon, Melbourne, St Kilda and Western Bulldogs are my bottom six pool. Tune in later this week as the middle and top six pools are revealed.
Macca
Guest
Ant - It is a bit hard to be seen when you aren't playing! Henderson & Menzel (who combined for over 50 goals in 2014 with neither playing a full season) weren't there for a start. Also the blues were without their 4 best mids (and 10 or 11 of their best side all up) which makes a forwards job a tad harder when the ball isn't coming in and when it does it doesn't come in well.
Ant
Guest
How did Carlton's much vaunted forward line go last night against an Eagles outfit missing McKenzie? They were nowhere to be seen lol! Watson kicks 6 in an intraclub and then has 2 disposals in half a game and he's a dangerous forward? Casboult got clobbered and Jones looked inept as he usually does. I think your in for a world of pain Macca!
Macca
Guest
Ant 1 more thing Giles in 2012 Averaged 14.2 disposals, 3.5 marks & 0.9 goals (20 games)(when GWS were their worst), in 2013 it was 10.5, 1.4 & 0.6 (22 games)and in 2014 it was 8.3, 0.9 & 0.8 (9 games) - he has been getting steadily worse and is 27. Casboult on the other hand average 9 diposals, 1.2 goals & 5.2 marks (6 games), in 2013 it was 9.1, 0.6 & 4.4 (11 games) and 2014 saw 10.5, 0.8 & 5.7 (19 games) - he is on the way up and is 25.
Macca
Guest
Aransan - I'll take your word he is 191cm but that is still small even for a third tall and too small to play as a ruckman for any length of time (either in games or for the season) - he's more a Menzel or Walker than Casboult.
Macca
Guest
Ant - You think kicking 39 goals in 51 games is a good thing? You think averaging jsut 2 marks a game in your career is a good thing? And It GWS were so terrible and Giles so good why couldn't he get a game for them? And Carlisle might have had a limited pre-season which lead to him being out of form but he still averaged less goals a game than Henderson (Did he have hip surgery like Henderson?). And yes he kicked 12 goals in 2 games (against terrible defensive sides but in the other 17 games he kicked 15 goals and went goalless 8 times for the year - yes he showed he could be a quality player but he has a long way to go. And again this isn't about whether you will be better than Carlton it is about whether you will be better than at least 10 other sides.
Aransan
Guest
Macca, I have asked Essendon to correct their web site which has him at 185cm and 77kg -- perhaps when he was 16y.o.? Wikipedia has him at 191cm and 88kg which is close to what I remember. Also check: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/paddy-ambrose-the-bomber-who-came-from-the-clouds-20140404-zqqnb.html
Ant
Guest
So Giles kicked 40 goals in 50 games in a very ordinary side that got belted every week and you don't think he's got the ability to play as a ruck/forward with delivery from the likes of Watson, Goddard, Heppell, Cooney, Zaharakis and Co? You just lost any credibility you may have had. That argument about Giles is self-defeating. As for Henderson.. "Had a limited pre-season and endured a loss of form". You think Carlisle had a full pre-season? He was out of form for half the season. You saw what he was capable of in two matches back to back. I don't see Henderson taking 17 marks and kicking 4.2 then kicking 8 the next week against multiple opponents. Admit defeat for once mate, the fact that Essendon have finished higher on the ladder for the past 3-4 seasons shows that we're a better team than Carlton and have a better list.
Macca
Guest
Aransan - The bombers website has him listed at 185m as well. I wasn't commenting 1 way or the other about the positives or negatives of height of ruckmen I just included their heights for completeness when I was listing the heights of the forwards.
Aransan
Guest
Macca, I am sure the height given for Ambrose is wrong. Everyone at Essendon was at training so I couldn't check this but my memory is that he is about 193cm tall and I can even remember one game where he rucked OK for a period. I wouldn't have too much faith in 204cm and 206cm ruckmen these days, they have gone the way of the dinosaurs. Sandilands is an exception. The ideal is a mobile 196-198cm ruckman like Paddy Ryder and there aren't too many of those around.
Macca
Guest
Ant - in 51 games Giles has 39 goals - where is the evidence he can "kick a goal"? He also only has 108 marks in his 51 games - is he really a decent ruckman? Wood & Warnock aren't top shelf but they are our 2nd and 3rd options for a ruckman and Casboult is in front of both of them for the Ruck Forward spot. "Our forward line’s reflect our finishing positions which is why we continue to be a much better side than you." Last year the Blues outscored the Bombers so not sure how that is true. "We also smashed you by 80 points without a recognised ruck last year" Yes and you were lucky to escape with a draw against us while we were missing about 7 first choice players so whats your point? "Carlisle and Daniher are much better than Casboult and Henderson" Well Henderson averaged more goals per game than both Daniher and Carlisle in a year he missed a lot of the pre-season and was down on form and Casboult is our ruck forward - which you don't have & Jones is our 3rd tall. And at the end of the day Ant even if your forward line is marginally better than the blues (which is doubtful) a lot is going to have to go right for the BLues to make the 8 this year so are you arguing your are good enough to be 8th?
Ant
Guest
Warnock and Wood are both horrible players! Warnock couldn't hit the side of a barn door and Wood's not much better. Our forward worked just fine in 2013 and Bomber stuffing around with set-ups mucked with our ability to score. Giles is a decent ruckman who can kick a goal despite your attempts to say otherwise. What's wrong with having Giles in the ruck and Bellchambers resting forward and vice versa? Carlisle and Daniher are much better than Casboult and Henderson. Henderson's basically a flanker with a good kick and that's it. Our forward line's reflect our finishing positions which is why we continue to be a much better side than you. We also smashed you by 80 points without a recognised ruck last year, so I'd worry more about Carlton trying to stay out of the bottom four rather than criticising our set-ups which have been and will continue to be effective.
Macca
Guest
Aransan - Ambrose is listed at 185cm on Footywire and has 13 goals from 16 games, I would say he is the equivalent to Carltons Menzel who is listed at 187cm but kicked 26 goals from 19 games last year. And you may not be able to play 2 out and out ruckmen but you need a ruck forward - someone who can give Bellchambers a rest and be dangerous up forward. Who will give Bell Chambers a chop out? As for the BLues they will play Wood (204cm) (probably) or Warnock (206cm) (possibly) as the ruck (Kreuzer (200cm) will take this role when he returns) and Casboult (199cm) as the ruck forward with Henderson (196m) and Jones (198cm) (probably) or Watson (195cm) (possibly) as the 3rd tall with Menzel as the mid size forward. They will probably also use Walker (190cm) & Everitt (194cm) rotating through. That to me gives them a much more dangerous marking forward line than Daniher (201cm) & Carlisle (198cm) with Ambrose, Winderlich (188cm) and probably Goddard (189cm) with Bellchambers (202cm) in the ruck and a better second ruckman.
Aransan
Guest
Macca, you don't need two ruckmen in a side. A third tall marking option for Essendon is Ambrose, I am not sure you could play all of Carlisle, Daniher, Ambrose, and Bellchambers/Giles together on the forward line. An alternative to two key forwards and a ruck forward is three marking options with one pinch hitting in the ruck -- will Carlton be doing this early in the season? These things are not set in stone.
Macca
Guest
Aransan - Giles not getting picked is exactly my point, good team will have two key forwards and a ruck forward these days giving them 3 marking options going forward - if Giles doesn't play the bombers have 2.
Aransan
Guest
Macca, if Giles doesn't give much he won't be picked. Two ruckmen won't work in a team unless they both contribute. I believe Essendon will have enough firepower on the forward line without having to depend on Giles and they can get enough from elsewhere to cover the ruck. You may remember in the first game between Essendon and Carlton last year Essendon did not have a recognised ruckman. By backup I am allowing for the possibility that Bellchambers might not be available for a particular game. I wouldn't take too much notice of the forward line statistics from last year, Daniher started the season with a handful of games and Carlisle was having to adjust to a new position which must be the hardest place to play on the ground. Also, often the delivery onto the forward line was slow and inaccurate. Daniher's kicking for goal last year was poor, especially the number of kicks that went out of bounds. I am confident that his goal kicking will be much improved this year and it will need to be.
Macca
Guest
Aransan - " Giles but every team needs a backup ruckman and McKernan from the rookies list gives added protection" Part of my point is that Giles won't be a back up ruckman" - with Ryder gone Bellchambers will be your number 1 ruck and Giles the Ruck forward - I don't think Giles will give you much in that role which puts pressure on Carlisle and Daniher. Carlisle and Daniher could quite well have career best seasons (but that could see both players kicking less than 30 goals) but to expect all 4 to hit career best form is optimistic. I am not saying it won't happen but I wouldn't bet my house on it and I certainly wouldn't bet that the improvement is enough to see the bombers significantly improve their scoring capacity given the loss of Ryder.
Aransan
Guest
Macca, I can't see why Daniher and Carlisle won't have career best seasons and in fact I expect it. Bellchambers was injured last year and shouldn't have played some of the games he did, circumstances meant that Essendon basically didn't have a ruckman available at one stage -- Hille had retired and Essendon's two ruck men were unavailable. Bellchambers plays best as the number 1 ruckman and the departure of Ryder, while a significant loss, gives him that opportunity and responsibility. His tap-work is comparable to Ryders, he is not quite as good on the forward line and Ryders mobility is unequalled within the AFL. I don't know much about Giles but every team needs a backup ruckman and McKernan from the rookies list gives added protection.
Macca
Guest
Ant Bellchambers kicked 28 goals in 18 games in 2013 - for his career he has 51 in 69 games - so outside of 2013 he has 23 goals in 51 games - that points to 2013 being an abberation rather than the rule! And your argument is dependent on Daniher, Carlisle, Bellchambers & Giles all having career best seasons - that seems optimistic to me.
Macca
Guest
Ant outside of 2013 how many goals has Bellchmbers kicked in his career? And without Ryder Bellchambers will have to be the number 1 ruck restricting his ability to kick goals. That would mean Giles (who has been ordinary for all but 1 season of his career) would become your ruck forward and as he only averages 2.1 marks a game I don't see him adding much. All in all Ryders loss will offset at least part of any improvement form Carlisle & Daniher and given your struggles to score last year you need all the improvement you can get.
Gecko
Guest
Aransen you're probably more of a Bellchambers fan than me. I saw a bloke that was good at hit-outs, okay at taking marks up forward and pretty useless at the other 80% of the game. Natanui can chase, Mumford, Maric and Minsen can lay crunching tackles at ground level, Pyke and McEvoy take marks around the ground. Bellchambers didn't seem particularly good at any of these other things, and even seemed a bit lazy. I guess we'll find out more in the next few months. Ant could I suggest when you talk about any forwards' 'stats', that you also look at their defensive stats? Geelong won three premierships rebounding from blokes that couldn't tackle.