On 09/10/2014 at 13:41, sweet dee said:

Garlett for basically free does nothing for you? Just meh?

#61 could have netted a strong bodied midfielder playing for a very strong VFA side.

Roos is very good at picking out that sort of player with the right attitude and determination.

Anyhoo....

  On 09/10/2014 at 13:38, hogans_heroes said:

How does the addition of Garlett mean we wont develop Kent and JKH?

and by the way, Kent and JKH are midfielders, Garlett is a small forward

50% right is a damn good effort!

Welcome aboard Jeff.

He's certainly made it into the AFL the hard way.

  Quote

Garlett played his early football for Burracoppin, before playing for Swan Districts in the West Australian Football League in 2007. Garlett was homeless for much of the time that he was playing for Swans, often sleeping in the back of cars going for days without eating. Once the club discovered this, he lived with Anne and Maurice Embley (parents of many Swan Districts players, including West Coast's Andrew Embley) and with Swans captain Shane Beros.

And what's not to like about his pedigree?

  Quote

Garlett has many relatives who are also Australian rules footballers. He is cousins with Lance Franklin, Cruize Garlett and Des Headland, and is the nephew of Leon Davis.

If he can get back to enjoying his footy again and kick a few then it'll be a massive win. And at the price we paid it's hard to see a downside.

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:21, jumbo returns said:

#61 could have netted a strong bodied midfielder playing for a very strong VFA side.

Roos is very good at picking out that sort of player with the right attitude and determination.

Anyhoo....

Take that bloke at 83 or in the Rookie Draft then... No-one else is picking up this fairy tale of yours.

You just like being contrary.

Garlett is a proven AFL performer. And has 5+ years left if Roos can screw his head on properly.

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:38, rpfc said:

Take that bloke at 83 or in the Rookie Draft then... No-one else is picking up this fairy tale of yours.

You just like being contrary.

Garlett is a proven AFL performer. And has 5+ years left if Roos can screw his head on properly.

I'm not being contrary, I'm just not convinced.

Hope that's okay with the knights of this forum.

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:21, jumbo returns said:

#61 could have netted a strong bodied midfielder playing for a very strong VFA side.

Roos is very good at picking out that sort of player with the right attitude and determination.

Anyhoo....

I'll back Roos to make the right choice about how to spend pick 61. I reckon he has a little more of an idea than I do.

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:54, jumbo returns said:

I'm not being contrary, I'm just not convinced.

Hope that's okay with the knights of this forum.

As a Knight of Demonland, I have bequeathed you as contrary and will remain as such until another Knight relieves you, or Nasher tells me to quit it...

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:54, jumbo returns said:

I'm not being contrary, I'm just not convinced.

Hope that's okay with the knights of this forum.

Garlett is about the NOW.

I would agree with RPFC...they types you suggest might be rookied etc.

As much as anyone may disagree, although that seems to be the minority, I've got to say I'm quite happy with this trade.

Many of us have spent the last couple of years bleating about the lack of sufficient crumb around our forward line and Garlett will bring that at a relatively low cost, pick wise. We will see a different Melbourne side in round 1, or at least I bloody hope so

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:21, jumbo returns said:

#61 could have netted a strong bodied midfielder playing for a very strong VFA side.

Roos is very good at picking out that sort of player with the right attitude and determination.

Anyhoo....

If he doesn't get a game or fails to kick 10 goals then we bought a stuggling player.

If he kicks 15 this year we've done OK. Not great, but certainly OK for the price.

If he kicks 30 we've won by a fair margin.

If he kicks 40+ then we've just been given 2 or 3 extra wins for the price of pick #61

Now I don't presume to know how it will pan out, but pick #61 on the 3 in 4 chance he'll add something to the team, and a 50/50 that he'll add a lot, says to me we've risked very little in order to (hopefully) gain a lot.

I fail to see the downside in this trade.

At worse a significant upgrade on Burns, cost nothing, fills a need identified by recruiting staff.

Not sure what's not to like here.

Heres a list of players picked up at #61 in draft for the last few drafts

2013: Jamie Bennell WC (Rookie elevation)

2012: Taylor Hine NM (Coincidentally we trade North pick 61 then)

2011: Alex Brown Syd (Delisted now)

2010: Jarryd Lyons Adelaide

2009: James Craig Adelaide (Now delisted

2008: Campbell Heath Syd (Now delisted)

2007: Jaxson Barham Coll (Now delisted)

It's not that useful of a pick

Getting him basically for free is certainly acceptable.

Looks a lot more intelligent in red, too.

  On 09/10/2014 at 22:44, thedeeman said:

Heres a list of players picked up at #61 in draft for the last few drafts

2013: Jamie Bennel WC (Rookie elevation)

2012: Taylor Hine NM (Coincidentally we trade North pick 61 then)

2011: Alex Brown Syd (Delisted now)

2010: Jarryd Lyons Adelaide

2009: James Craig Adelaide (Now delisted

2008: Campbell Heath Syd (Now delisted)

2007: Jaxson Barham Coll (Now delisted)

It's not that useful of a pick

That is the worst way to assess the value of a pick.

I think a distinct problem is we get far too caught up in the numbers game.

Put those aside for a moment and loot at the job before the club.

It has a shopping list of roles/players it wants/need to fulfill gaps in the list

To all intents picks cease of value once the whole period ( trade-draft ) is over its all about did we get the players to fill the holes.

The merry go round of how you achieve it is really numerical semantics. Its either, yes....or no.

The picks etc are just a means to an end and really carry no more weight than the ability to contribute to dealing.

Im happy to wait on the final outcome of ALL the trading /drafting before getting ecstatic or otherwise.

its about outcomes...thats all I'm saying

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:06, Gorgoroth said:

A lady at work who follows the Blues is still shattered. Says its the greatest blunder in their trading history.

Well, they've had a few.

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:21, jumbo returns said:

#61 could have netted a strong bodied midfielder playing for a very strong VFA side.

Roos is very good at picking out that sort of player with the right attitude and determination.

Anyhoo....

Jesus, mate. Really? I don't want strong bodied VFA players. I want proven AFL players. Garlett is just that.

  On 09/10/2014 at 11:21, Lord Ivanhoe said:

Firstly, Welcome to Melbourne Football Club Jeff Garlett. May you ( & We) have a long and fruitful career together.

On listening to his interview on the MFC Website, IMHO, I believe he lost track this year when he lost his friend and confidant Eddie Betts to Adelaide. So he may have been easily led astray. (He mentioned he played his best when he had 'Good People & Good Energy around him)

As Jeff said he gets along well with Neville Jetta (both being from W.A.) who will be able to teach him what it takes to resurrect oneself. Also that he spoke to Davey who can now also be a good role model for him.

I feel that with like minded Friends & Community, such as Nev & Flash (& others) there is more potential for the best in Jeff Garlett, ie Good People & Good Energy.

and add in a human, intelligent and intelligible coach

  On 09/10/2014 at 12:19, jumbo returns said:

Just meh.

Strikes me as a player who's cooked.

Better to develop JKH and Kent.

Do you think that the two ideas are mutually exclusive? Should we just wait and maybe waste another year while these guys come on, and not play a proven performer to help win a few, and help guide JKH and Kent.

  On 10/10/2014 at 01:54, AdamFarr said:

Jesus, mate. Really? I don't want strong bodied VFA players. I want proven AFL players. Garlett is just that.

What you don't want a Magner? Sheez.

Garlett will feast on all the crumbs from the marks dawes drops. But seriously i'm really pleased we got him - as Mahoney said we needed a crumbing forward who can do some stints in the middle. And now we have one.

  On 10/10/2014 at 00:59, beelzebub said:

I think a distinct problem is we get far too caught up in the numbers game.

Put those aside for a moment and loot at the job before the club.

It has a shopping list of roles/players it wants/need to fulfill gaps in the list

To all intents picks cease of value once the whole period ( trade-draft ) is over its all about did we get the players to fill the holes.

The merry go round of how you achieve it is really numerical semantics. Its either, yes....or no.

The picks etc are just a means to an end and really carry no more weight than the ability to contribute to dealing.

Im happy to wait on the final outcome of ALL the trading /drafting before getting ecstatic or otherwise.

its about outcomes...thats all I'm saying

A couple of years ago, what you're saying here (which is eminently sensible) would have been described as "moneyball". But because moneyball is now inextricably linked on this forum with Mark Neeld, it's a word no-one now wishes to use. In short, the recruiting strategy seems the same but the recruitment decisions seem to be of a higher quality. Perhaps we are being helped by more players being attracted to Melbourne with Roos at the helm giving him a better pool to select from.

  On 10/10/2014 at 03:25, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

A couple of years ago, what you're saying here (which is eminently sensible) would have been described as "moneyball". But because moneyball is now inextricably linked on this forum with Mark Neeld, it's a word no-one now wishes to use. In short, the recruiting strategy seems the same but the recruitment decisions seem to be of a higher quality. Perhaps we are being helped by more players being attracted to Melbourne with Roos at the helm giving him a better pool to select from.

It wasn't even Moneyball when Neeld did what he did.

Neeld brought in players from other clubs aho, as you say, were of a different quality than the ones that Roos has been able to get.

Dawes, Clark, Pedersen, Byrnes, Gillies and Rodan.

Tyson, Vince, Cross, Garlett, Michie, Riley, and Lumumba.

It is not Moneyball, it is just recruitment. One being far better at it than the other.

Frankly, as someone who knows baseball, those that relate Moneyball to what happens in the AFL are kidding themselves.

  On 10/10/2014 at 00:21, Clint Bizkit said:

That is the worst way to assess the value of a pick.

How? I'm just showing how it's been used in the past, odds are the player will end up delisted

8 Goals in Round 1 please Jeff.

2 Carlton mates are shattered today.

Waite they got nothing.

Garlett pick 61 & 77?

& nobody wants Robinson!!

  On 09/10/2014 at 21:21, jumbo returns said:

#61 could have netted a strong bodied midfielder playing for a very strong VFA side.

Roos is very good at picking out that sort of player with the right attitude and determination.

Anyhoo....

Yeah lets get Valenti and Magner.. ha ha

  On 10/10/2014 at 03:50, thedeeman said:

How? I'm just showing how it's been used in the past, odds are the player will end up delisted

Realistically you need to include every single player drafted from 61 onwards, just because a player is taken at that exact number doesn't mean much.