Interesting, although the picture really indicates how many injuries the club has had, as opposed to the impact the injuries have had.
It doesn’t show:
The caliber of the injured player (eg McGrath being injured is different to Cahill being injured, though I know the article goes into a bit more depth about this.)
The position the player plays (eg losing 1st choice ruck is different to losing a HBF)
What the club’s depth is like for that a particular position (eg we have a lot of tall defenders and swingmen, other clubs might not.)
Whether players (especially those in similar positions) were injured simultaneously (losing 3 players for a week each, but all at the same time is different to losing 3 players for a week each consecutively.)
Agree.
This has been a dodgy as all get out stat trotted out by CD over the last few years.
I went in to detail (as far as you can) in the past and it’s got more holes than Swiss cheese.
Despite their protestations.
Couldn’t be stuffed doing it again.
But for those with more time, broadly; their assumptions about missing players are outdated & dodgy, their assumptions about depth players & the positions they play are sometimes insane
- eg you lose a CHB & move the third tall to cover, rather than your Two’s CHB, choosing to play someone like Guelfi off the HBF, and bring a replacement small forward in. Then compare the stats of the CHB to the small forward??? …
And they make no allowance for fading, older, players - if they’re injured they’re rated as their best, rather than the journeyman they’ve become.
Etc etc.
To be honest, I’d have said our injury run hasn’t been too bad. We seem to have consistently had 3-4 players out of our best 22 on long term injuries (Shiel, Caldwell, Draper replaced by McGrath, Snelling), but mostly in areas we have cover (midfield, ruck). Most of the others are guys who either have had short-term injuries (Stringer 2 weeks), or players who aren’t best 22 and often are expected to be delisted/retire soon (Gleeson, Clarke, Hurley, Zaka, Cutler).
The biggest issue is our lack of depth, which we knew before the season started. Which wasn’t really a problem as we didn’t expect to be challenging for finals.
The ladder in that picture isn’t the “ladder” in the article that tries to rate the quality of injuries above replacement.
You’ll be pleased to know that the experts at Champion Data have created a nice formula that basically says "Essendon may have had a high number of games missed because of injury, but it hasn’t affected them because the players missing have been replaced by players as good as them"band has us hardly affected at all, in spite of having a large number of games missed.
There are a number of potential issues with this method, as it doesn’t actually account for what a team is trying to achieve, or how a team plays, it just uses a formula to calculate a players value and then a formula to calculate the value of the replacement.
I haven’t dug deeply into it, but it appears the formula utilises CD ranking points to some degree to great a “points above replacement” value. From my knowledge of ranking points, they are heavily influenced by having 3 years of data against a player. I am guessing that utilising their method having Draper replaced by Phillips might have lead to a theoretical “no lost impact on matches due to injury” (or even a gain due to their algorithm), when we all know that would not be true.
The same would go for a few other cases where we replace (for instance) Caldwell with someone else. It might be stuff all loss against a player of similar age and experience, or a negative loss if the “replacement” is Zaharakis
Anyway, on their method Essendon, Gold Coast and Carlton are the ones that dropped down the ladder significantly from the total injuries to impact of injuries list.
IE teams that were rated as rubbish by CD that has significant injuries to young players basically aren’t counted properly.
Shiel was on RSN this morn, sounds like he hit a speed bump in his recovery and says he will play around the 16 week mark (the original time frame), which is 3-4 weeks away 
Was a great article about Tommy turbos dominant origin win and his recovery from hamstrings.
Apparently the go is now to do a lot of hard sprints in recovery. Really test em.
And when you play, like he did and dominated in SOO he actually was running at about 85%.
Apparently it’s part of cutting edge prep now and has turned hamstring treatment on its head. Hope they have the best around Jye in his recovery.
Of course he has. We’re so good at managing injuries.
shiel aiming for rd 18
my 6 week prognosis is looking good!
Shiel reckons another month so probably round 19 if he hits the 16 week mark
His year is done, just get him ready for next season
Considering he’d only recently got on the alterG it’s hardly surprising would need a solid month lead in of actual running
Agree
Shiel and Hurley will be huge ins next year
Hurley isn’t best 22 in 2022.
Whose spot would he take?
He was poor in 2020 and can’t see him improving with age given how cooked his body is.
Hookers probably
Hurley will be bl**dy lucky to play 7 games to get to 200.
What position do you think he will play ?
Go Collingwood, injury free year and still bottom 4 
Probably forward if Hooker goes