Jump to content

deelusions from afar

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

60 Excellent

About deelusions from afar

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,698 profile views
  1. I wonder if Goldcoast didn't have pick 2, whether we still might have taken Jackson anyway?
  2. I find it interesting that they have Lockhart training as a small defender (from reports). To me this suggests that they must intend to draft at least one specialist small forward and maybe even two. I thought Lockhart is one of the few on the list that might be able to play this role - too early to know if Bedford, Chandler etc will make it but it's one of the hardest positions to play so the odds are stacked against them in any case.
  3. Trying to follow... are you saying GWS might trade pick 4 for two of our picks?
  4. Is it just me or do others think that our "forward line issues" are really just the outcome of problems further up the ground? McDonald was poor in 2019 and Weid didn't come on like we hoped, but my memory of the games - particularly early in the season was terrible inside 50s and a low number of them compared to 2018. I honestly don't think the best forwards in the game would have made much difference. I think Fritsch and Melksham playing most games forward in 2020 will make a huge difference (and potentially injury free Hannan, Smith and McDonald) - but I think it is more about the additions of Langdon and Tomlinson (and maybe someone like Young) who give us a bit more run so that we are not so pressured and fatigued when kicking inside 50. Obviously some improvements / upgrades on the small pressure forwards locking the ball in wouldn't go astray either. Get the midfield run and delivery right and it won't matter whether we have A grade key position forwards - Weid and McDonald are good enough.
  5. No we trade 3 for GWS's 6 (plus the best deal we can get e.g. next year's first rounder and anything else). We then use 6 (and whatever else from received from GWS) to trade for Freo's 7 and 10. Then we pick the three kids we want with picks 7, 8 and 10 - we miss a couple but there doesn't seem a clear consensus on the order of them in any case. Worst case scenario if GWS or Freo don't trade and don't match our bid, we end up with Greene and/or Henry - very unlikely and not a bad outcome in anycase!
  6. I still think we'll do some deals on the night with Freo and potentially GWS so that we convert 3 and 8 into 7,8 and 10. If it's as even as people say around these picks then at least we get 3 goes at it - Freo and GWS would be open to a deal due to their Academy picks.
  7. I get the sense that we don't rate these players in the same order as other clubs so who we would pick with 3 might still be there at 6 or 7. I'm hoping we do deals with GWS and then Freo to end up with 7, 8 and 10 rather 3 and 8. That way we're likely to get 3 of Young, Serong, Ash, Kemp, Stephens, Weightman (or anyone else I've missed).
  8. Agree that threats aren't the way to negotiate (and not Mahoney's style). It only works if we rate Henry and are genuinely prepared to take him. Given we have another top 10 pick and we need a small forward (and have suggested this is what we'll target in the draft) I think he might be on our radar. I'd love to get him as he seems like a very good prospect - but there's lots of draft experts that follow it closer than me.
  9. I imagine we wouldn't mind landing Henry - what if GWS trade 6 and next year's first for pick 3. We might then threaten to use 6 on Henry. Could this be enough to prize 7 and 10 out of freo (we might need to give up next year's first from GWS?)
  10. I might be missing something here. But why wouldn't Goldcoast just redraft him (assuming they can fit him in - and they finished 18th so surely they can!). Even if he sits out the year sulking on $700k (or whatever Carlton are prepared to pay him), they will get another early pick in compensation when he leaves for Carlton at the end of the year. So say they finish bottom, it would end up being another top 2 pick? Maybe someone who knows the rules can clarify.
  11. Wrote this before seeing your post GawnDog... good minds think alike! Got a theory – so bear with me! I think there will be fireworks on the trade night. 1. Melbourne has made no secret that we are after small forwards – particularly with publicly chasing Elliot. That in itself is strange because our pattern the last few years is to only allow the speculation (leak to media?) when we know we are going to get our target (Lever, May, Langdon & Tomlinson). 2. We have a history of bidding on academy players (not sure exactly which ones - Heeney, Mills?) so to say we will do again cannot be dismissed as bluff. 3. We have 2 picks in the top 10 – if Greene is as good as reported, it would not be a terrible thing to get him at 3 if GWS don’t match and we can still target the outside run with / small forward with 8. 4. GWS and Geelong are clearly interested in our pick 3 (it’s likely others such as Sydney would be too). Reportedly, GWS offering 6 and next year’s first round is not enough for us to trade 3. Well played! 5. The draft “experts” have said the best small forwards are Liam Henry (Freo academy) and Cody Weightman – depending on what you believe Melbourne rates Cody as high as 3 and others believe he will go as late as around pick 28. 6. Fremantle hold picks 7 and 10. 7. Unlike some years, there seems to be little consensus among the draft “experts” as to the best players from 3-12ish. Is there a way we could trade pick 3 and end up with 7 and 10 (while keeping 8)? Given the reported evenness of the draft, I think this would be an enormous win. How do we do this? Probably smarter minds than I would have a better idea. I don’t think Freo would trade 7 and 10 for 3 (and probably wouldn’t believe we would nominate Henry at 3) but if GWS believe we will take Greene at 3, then they will be forced to offer us a deal we can’t refuse – pick 6, next years first + anything else they have / can trade for. We then have 6 and 8 and tell Freo we will nominate Henry with 6 – because picking him at 6 would not be a terrible thing for us at all. He is reportedly a gun and fulfils our need. They trade us 7 and 10 for 6 (not sure how much of what else we’ve received from GWS would need to be part of the deal). They can then draft someone with pick 6 and Henry with their next pick - 22 (I think that’s right?). We can then use 7,8 and 10 to get Weightman and 2 of Serong / Stephens, Flanders / Ash / Kemp / Young / whoever else I’m missing
  12. Will be interesting to see what they do with S Selwood - they seem to use him a bit as their pressure forward of late with reasonable success... but surely they would want him in the centre stopping Oliver or Brayshaw
  13. After the injuries over the weekend, it got me thinking that although very unlucky for the individuals concerned (particularly the battles Tyson and Kent each have had this year and had seemingly overcome), we had dodged a bullet in terms of the injured players not de-railing our finals campaign – perhaps it is easier to say this with Viney ready to go and Hannan looking like he will come back in for Kent. Maybe Tyson is a chance in any case. It got me thinking about who is the most valuable member of the side – not the best player – but the player who if they went down to suspension or injury, it would have the most detrimental impact to us. Obviously this is something that changes constantly with development, form and number of games played – AvB has been enormous since coming back in but has only played a few games & Harmes has hit a purple patch… do we measure him at this standard now, is there a like-for-like replacement on the list if they are out, how important is the running capacity of ANB or other role players, how experienced they are (I don’t put great weight on this) etc. I have Hunt last in this list, but I feel like up to halfway through last year he would almost have been top 5. Hopefully he can get back there next year. It’s interesting to ponder – not just in terms of the players we’d least like to lose in the finals but also those who have missed a significant amount of footy this year. Anyway, here’s my list as of form to date this year. Would be interested to hear other people’s thoughts. 1. Gawn 2. Oliver 3. Tmac 4. Hibberd 5. Viney 6. Lever 7. Brayshaw 8. Harmes 9. Hogan 10. Jetta 11. Melksham 12. Salem 13. Frost 14. Fritsch 15. AvB 16. ANB 17. Petracca 18. Omac 19. Lewis 20. Jones 21. Weiderman 22. Spargo 23. Kent 24. Stretch 25. Tyson 26. Vince 27. Smith, J 28. JKH 29. Garlett 30. Pederson 31. Smith, T 32. Wagner 33. Hunt
  14. Good post. I found this interesting too. I took it more to mean that he is well aware and doesn't want the media to look into it so it becomes "a thing" - so just dismissed it. Clearly it would be a concern. I'm also concerned we seem to be worse at the MCG than we used to be - given it is our home ground and where the GF is played this clearly is not deliberate. I'm hoping it is more about tidying up our weaknesses e.g. defenders having confidence in each other and therefore not flying together, Tmac / Weid straightening us up & perhaps adding some more speed to the team - Viney & whoever makes it out of J Smith / Frost / Baker / Stretch at the expense of the slowest (Lewis / Vince / Tyson). Maybe (hopefully) these things will be enough for us to get our "game plan" to click at the MCG. Because the current style of kicking to the boundary (same side every time) and backing your inside mids to win it every time is far too predictable, leads to poor and wide I50s and will not stand up against anyone in September.
  15. "...The 41-year-old Goodwin, entering his sophomore season as senior coach..." I hate this American jargon being brought into our sport. Why wouldn't they just say second? Looks like Fox Footy are trying to squeeze a little more out of this non story. The headline and article are over the top when you read what Goody's quoted as saying.
  • Create New...