Id field offers for Garlo and Grimes.. Time to get mercenary/

TMac worries me still.. 50% greatness . 50% sub par abilities ( skills and decisions ) ...needs to change !!

TMac just needs to learn he is not the anchorman who we play through from defence.

As far as kep position defneders go I have no issues with him, way ahead of Glass/Mckenzie at the same stage in their careers.

So he has played every game this season coz Roos doesn't care about those things, this is yet another Demonland myth, he is another one whose disposal efficiency is consistently in the 80% and above....his only knock for me was giving away too many cheap free kicks which he has fixed, and set shot for goal which he has fixed, let's not give a player kudos for actually working on improving

I still some flaws but I see a footballer who has definitely improved and is working on his shortcomings.

I would be gobsmacked if Bail was moved on.

Will Bail be a superstar ? nah . but I think he can be a player who plays his role every week. I think he has had a remarkably consistent this year.

What posters fail to realise is that great sides are made up of champions, good footballers and then role players. The likes of Sydney and Hawthorn are not great because of the first five players picked each week - they are great because of the last 5 players picked. ( I look back to when StKilda where challenging under Lyon - their top end was fantastic - their last five players picked would have struggled to get games in other clubs). We unfortunately are missing top end talent but you don't throw out a consistent role player just because he has a limited ceiling. We undoubtedly need much better players than Bail - that doesnt mean there isnt a place for Bail in the team.

TMac just needs to learn he is not the anchorman who we play through from defence.

As far as kep position defneders go I have no issues with him, way ahead of Glass/Mckenzie at the same stage in their careers.

When Tmac disposes of the ball quickly (instinctively) he is fine - when he has time to think and starts to assess - that's when he gets scary.

Edited August 6, 201411 yr by nutbean

Cross is four times the player that McKenzie will ever be IMO.

Gee that's generous to McKenzie.

You know your list is in trouble when Bail is a being talked about as a 'keeper'.

Cross recently signed for another year.

Pretty much agree. I'd keep Bail and Watts for one more year and give Harmes and King a crack.

Watts has to be traded this year, otherwise clubs looking at him will consider him too old by the time he spends a year or so getting acquainted to their club system.

Saty I don't believe I have ever said fling him.

In the scheme of things I believe he is an average at best player.

If he was involved as a part of a trade deal for a better player I would do it in a heart beat.

What you say about the improvements he has made under Roos might all be true but IMO he is at best average and that is it.

Now it is only my opinion.

I would be gobsmacked if Bail was moved on.

Will Bail be a superstar ? nah . but I think he can be a player who plays his role every week. I think he has had a remarkably consistent this year.

What posters fail to realise is that great sides are made up of champions, good footballers and then role players. The likes of Sydney and Hawthorn are not great because of the first five players picked each week - they are great because of the last 5 players picked. ( I look back to when StKilda where challenging under Lyon - their top end was fantastic - their last five players picked would have struggled to get games in other clubs). We unfortunately are missing top end talent but you don't throw out a consistent role player just because he has a limited ceiling. We undoubtedly need much better players than Bail - that doesnt mean there isnt a place for Bail in the team.

Good summary 'bean.

I still some flaws but I see a footballer who has definitely improved and is working on his shortcomings.

I would be gobsmacked if Bail was moved on.

Will Bail be a superstar ? nah . but I think he can be a player who plays his role every week. I think he has had a remarkably consistent this year.

What posters fail to realise is that great sides are made up of champions, good footballers and then role players. The likes of Sydney and Hawthorn are not great because of the first five players picked each week - they are great because of the last 5 players picked. ( I look back to when StKilda where challenging under Lyon - their top end was fantastic - their last five players picked would have struggled to get games in other clubs). We unfortunately are missing top end talent but you don't throw out a consistent role player just because he has a limited ceiling. We undoubtedly need much better players than Bail - that doesnt mean there isnt a place for Bail in the team.

good job

I think we will keep Watts and trade him off at his 7 year mark next year. Roos has spoken about trading away players 1 yr before they become Free agents and if Frawley leaves this year I do not think Roos would hesitate on trading off Watts next year.

Saty, I'm not one to soley use stats alone, but what's his kicking efficiency and what is it over 25 meters, most flatter there's with small chips backwards.

You know your list is in trouble when Bail is a being talked about as a 'keeper'.

Your list is in trouble when there are not a lot of better footballers on the list than Bail.

I see him for what he is and is worth keeping - but we need a whole lot of better footballers than him. I think he has probably been in our top 10 most consistent this year - cudo's to him but what we need is for him to one fighting for the last couple of spots in the team.

It amazes me that people want to delist Bail.

We all know we have a problem moving the ball out of half back. While this is exacerbated by the decision making of our defenders, I reckon the underlying problem is the lack of movement up-field. Often a player will look up and see 2 or 3 opposition players to our 1 up the wing, which of course causes them to hesitate, look inside, look back up the wing, and ultimately make a rushed decision.

Rohan Bail is the ONLY player on our list who consistently and effectively makes an option up the field. If all our players had half the desire to do repeat leads that he does we would be an immeasurably better side.

Also an article in the HUN (i think?) the other day mentioned he's leading our pressure acts for the year.

Agree - we're rubbish at the next kick.

Bail runs hard, but he's too careless with his disposal.

players we should be building our side around:

hogan

n jones

salem

dawes

viney

trengove

tyson

dunn

kent

pedersen

jkh

mcdonald

gawn

howe

jetta

keep (no discernible trade value / veteran depth / under contract):

mckenzie

cross

vince

jamar

michie

riley

hunt

evans

georgiou

harms

king

trade bait:

watts

toumpas

garland

grimes

barry

tapscott

spencer

bail

m jones

terlich

fitzpatrick

ufa:

frawley

retired:

byrnes

clark

delist:

clisby

blease

strauss

nicholson

bail is absolutely a best-22 player for us, hence why i'd have him as a trade option. he's another player - like watts, toumpas, garland, etc - who will perform better in a better-performing side.

if we can get something of value for any of those 11 players (and tapscott only makes that list instead of 'delist' because he appears to have an afl-ready body), i'd definitely look at it. the concern is we 'spent big' in terms of draft picks on the likes of watts, toumpas, grimes, tapscott and we won't get anything like the deemed player 'value' back - but when you consider how those players have not lived up their billing, could a traded-for player or a draft pick perform better? there's reason to believe either could. however, they're our players with actual 'value' in the market.

i'd personally be loathe to trade grimes. he is a bit like pittard for port or houli for richmond - will drive you mental as a supporter, but does enough to be guaranteed best 22 at his club.

Edited August 6, 201411 yr by DemonAndrew

Your list is in trouble when there are not a lot of better footballers on the list than Bail.

I see him for what he is and is worth keeping - but we need a whole lot of better footballers than him. I think he has probably been in our top 10 most consistent this year - cudo's to him but what we need is for him to one fighting for the last couple of spots in the team.

He's been consistent because of his work ethic and ability to gut run. Which is the reason he was drafted.

As for football specific skills, they're almost non-existent.

Unfortunately for Melbourne, we've failed at drafting and developing players who have both aspects of their game covered. (i.e. A burning desire to work extremely hard on getting everything you can out of yourself and an ability to perform the basic fundamentals of our game to an AFL quality standard).

Bail has one aspect of the game covered which in my view explains his 'consistency'. His ability to get to contests and be in the right position this year has seen his possession count go up and that's attributed to his running capacity and ability to work hard.

The other side of his game however is deplorable.

We've still got blokes on our list who neither work hard enough, or have the skill to play at this level which contributes to people overvaluing a player like Bail.

So again:

You know your list is in trouble when Bail is being talked about as a 'keeper'.

Edited August 6, 201411 yr by stevethemanjordan

I still some flaws but I see a footballer who has definitely improved and is working on his shortcomings.

I would be gobsmacked if Bail was moved on.

Will Bail be a superstar ? nah . but I think he can be a player who plays his role every week. I think he has had a remarkably consistent this year.

What posters fail to realise is that great sides are made up of champions, good footballers and then role players. The likes of Sydney and Hawthorn are not great because of the first five players picked each week - they are great because of the last 5 players picked. ( I look back to when StKilda where challenging under Lyon - their top end was fantastic - their last five players picked would have struggled to get games in other clubs). We unfortunately are missing top end talent but you don't throw out a consistent role player just because he has a limited ceiling. We undoubtedly need much better players than Bail - that doesnt mean there isnt a place for Bail in the team.

Good post nutbean

Cross is four times the player that McKenzie will ever be IMO.

I'll 2nd that.

And the inclusion of McKenzie around the time that Cross was ommitted from injury really set us back. One of, if not the only, decent ball users in congestion and when under meaningful pressure. His handball is lightning as is his decision making. Mostly to our advantage and hitting targets, unlike many others who just seem lost in congestion with hands/decision making.

McKenzie is all effort and occasionaly when in the open he'll hit a target with handballs but that's about his limit IMO.

players we should be building our side around:

hogan

n jones

salem

dawes

viney

trengove

tyson

dunn

kent

pedersen

jkh

mcdonald

gawn

howe

jetta

keep (no discernible trade value / veteran depth / under contract):

mckenzie

cross

vince

jamar

michie

riley

hunt

evans

georgiou

harms

king

trade bait:

watts

toumpas

garland

grimes

barry

tapscott

spencer

bail

m jones

terlich

fitzpatrick

ufa:

frawley

retired:

byrnes

clark

delist:

clisby

blease

strauss

nicholson

bail is absolutely a best-22 player for us, hence why i'd have him as a trade option. he's another player - like watts, toumpas, garland, etc - who will perform better in a better-performing side.

if we can get something of value for any of those 11 players (and tapscott only makes that list instead of 'delist' because he appears to have an afl-ready body), i'd definitely look at it. the concern is we 'spent big' in terms of draft picks on the likes of watts, toumpas, grimes, tapscott and we won't get anything like the deemed player 'value' back - but when you consider how those players have not lived up their billing, could a traded-for player or a draft pick perform better? there's reason to believe either could. however, they're our players with actual 'value' in the market.

i'd personally be loathe to trade grimes. he is a bit like pittard for port or houli for richmond - will drive you mental as a supporter, but does enough to be guaranteed best 22 at his club.

Pretty good DA.

Not sure i'm sold on Grimes tough. His decision making is woeful. As is Tmacs once. Both are "panic" players when it comes to running the ball out of our backline, especially Grimes. But i will say in Tmacs support he does get to alot of contests on opponents (and leaves to become 3rd man etc) and kills many a ball in defence. The problem is when he gets it he quite often sells the player he is giving off to into trouble. And after delivery proceeds to run towards/into the player he just gave it to...ensuring both players are toast when their opponents are on their tail.

Seen it so many times. One thing he does give us also is some decent run off HB....but then there's the delivery/decision making by foot.....UGHH!

Bail's goal kicking has really improved. That's one positive. He's much more impressive as a defensive forward/hard working forward if when he gets a shot inside 50 he nails a good percentage. Don't have the stats to back it up exactly but just from watch he's a lot more confident and successful when kicking for goal.

There is surely going to be a clean out of players aged between 22 - 25 on our list who have not been able to cement a spot in our senior side. This is the bracket that we need to hit in my opinion.

Without taking existing contracts into consideration (or presuming we can either trade or payout anyone that we don't want/need next year, this is the way I see it;

The following 9 payers to be traded or de-listed. Presuming we can arrange a trade for at least 2 of these (albeit for late picks or other fringe players), that leaves us with approximately 7 spots to fill.

1) Jordie McKenzie (possible trade?)
2) Mitch Clisby
3) Sam Blease (possible trade?)
4) James Strauss
5) Daniel Nicholson
6) Michael Evans
7) Luke Tapscott (possible trade?)
8) Dean Terlich
9) Jack Fitzpatrick (possible trade?)

Note that the following 3 players get a reprieve due to not wanting to take too many low draft picks, and not having much ruck depth;

Rohan Bail

Matt Jones

Spencer

The following 2 players leaving under differing circumstances leaves us with approximately 9 spots to fill;

Frawley

Clark

Upgrade Jetta, which leaves us with approximately 8 spots to fill, plus a rookie.

1) 1st round pick

2 plus 3) compensation pick (trade for a player plus a pick)

4) 2nd round pick

5) 3rd round pick

6) 4th round pick

7) 5th round pick

8) presume 1 or 2 latish picks were traded in for say, Blease, Fitzpatrick, McKenzie or Tapscott

Rookie pick

In addition to all of this, I believe we should have Jack Watts on the trade table. Not necessarily for a draft pick - but in a player deal such as (eg); priority pick and Jack Watts for Tom Mitchell, Zac Jones and Nick Malceski.

Edited August 6, 201411 yr by Demon 16

The problem is he is getting paid $1+ million PA

To justify that money you need to putting in Buddy or Ablett performances not average results.

Fortunately his $1m is not our problem. He was only offered that because a bitter, senile old man wanted to [censored] us off, which backfired.

Congratulations - you apparently are better at spotting talent than any recruiter in the land.

Again - I ask anyone to back up their assertion that Scully was not the best junior in the land at draft time and would not go number one. ( for gods sake he was quoted as number one 18 months out from the draft and that never changed)

I will make this offer - if you can find me one article by any credentialed journalist quoting recruiters that Martin was a better choice than Scully then I will give 10 to the contrary.

And similar things should be said though perhaps less definitively about the Toump vs a Wines at the time of the draft.

I would have to be one of the most down about our chances this year, and up there with Old Dee with my opinion of the list - but I seem to be far more bullish about the immediate future than a lot of you.

So many to delist and trade...

I think there are some obvious decisions to be made but the gutting some of you think is necessary won't happen at the end of the year.

It is just not feasible, advisable, and it won't happen.

Not too many years ago we overhauled our list by 14.. I think with a little effort and conscientious endeavour we can do this , at least , again. Thats approx 25% of the list... It'll do as a starter.

What one can , indeed do is only limited by intent.

Not too many years ago we overhauled our list by 14.. I think with a little effort and conscientious endeavour we can do this , at least , again. Thats approx 25% of the list... It'll do as a starter.

What one can , indeed do is only limited by intent.

I agree ... however, Roos and Viney will need to be a lot more creative than what happened at the end of 2012 (when those 14 changes occurred) In our haste, we made a few too many errors at the end of that season.

We could sign up a delisted free agent or 2, another Tyson/Salem like deal might happen, trading a contracted player or 2 for multiple picks in return is possible (and then using those picks on some more established players)

If Frawley stays we could even pick up a free agent or 2 - there's still a few worthwhile choices still available. Our possible influx of players doesn't necessarily need to be dominated by drafting a whole host of kids.

I'm expecting the club to have a very busy off season. We may not be able to get everything done that we'd like to get done, but Roos has to act reasonably swiftly if rebuilding the list is at the forefront of his mind.

Not too many years ago we overhauled our list by 14.. I think with a little effort and conscientious endeavour we can do this , at least , again. Thats approx 25% of the list... It'll do as a starter.

What one can , indeed do is only limited by intent.

Should we though?

What good did it do last time we did it?