I'm tired, sue.

Only 3.5 more days and then we can drop off Demonland until draft day.

After their long injury layoffs, Trengove, Petracca and Frost are no way best 22 at the moment. Purely paper rating ATM. Need to show how well they have recovered. Bugg and Melksham are auto lock in until those guys can get on the park and perform.

Didn't Know Bugg was signed sealed and delivered??

It's called having an opinion. Bugg has played senior footy for 4 years. I've seen plenty of him. He's just another ordinary footballer.

One gets the distinct feeling they think they have to do something, this is something, therefore let's do this.

I agree with your last sentence.

Post your best 22 and assume we have Kennedy and Bugg on the list.

If you really feel that our Footy Department are contemplating recruitment of players because "they think they have to do something" then you are naive (and that's being very generous!). Maybe their selections will work out, and maybe they won't, but to suggest that players would be recruited for the sake of appearances and not because they are expected to improve our team, is being disrespectful towards our recruiters who have an excellent record in their player selections over the last couple of years.

Bugg is a strong bodied competitor and Kennedy was a star junior with decent pace and a strong left foot. Bugg may free up Viney so he can transition from a lockdown role to a more attacking inside cog. We need to improve our outside finishing, so Kennedy fills a role there, except he's never built an engine.

It's not hard to see why they'd target these types of players, I just doubt they're good enough to be permanent best 22.

Why did they target Mitchie, Riley and Newton ? We were trying to improve our midfield. None are best 22, but it's obvious why we did it.

Post your best 22 with Bugg and Kennedy in the team.

I guess that the point I'm trying to make is that with the list where it now is there is no point recruiting someone who you don't expect to become best 22 and in fact I'd argue that bar a couple of players the list is full of potential "best 22". That has not always been the case.

I think we are playing semantics. You are talking about "Best 22" and I'm talking about players having the ability (and a genuine crack) at becoming best 22. Like you I'm lukewarm on Bugg, think Melksham will be good value for money and think Kennedy clearly is more exciting than the other 2. Taylor was with Collingwood when he was drafted. We rated him very highly in his year (middle top 10 is what I've heard) so their was a body of good footy people who thought he had high level talent. I don't know why he hasn't made it at Collingwood but Taylor, Viney and O'Donnell would. Whether their confidence proves correct is to be seen but I certainly don't have the knowledge to say "poor move".

As for best 22 I'm not really interested. If you've ever done a best 22 at this time of year you'll notice that by the time we've played 4 rounds there are usually about 6 or 7 changes. If you want a team with Bugg and Kennedy in it I'll have them instead of Harmes and Lumumba. I have questions over Harmes tank and level of skill and I don't rate Lumumba. But really, who cares?

As others have pointed out best 22 is a flawed exercise. (Although admittedly a fun one)

Id love to see some historic stats for how many times a team has taken to the field with their 'best 22'. It would be rare as hens teeth.

Again, I would question how much people have actually SEEN of Bugg to be so dismissive of him or his ability.

Watching the one fixture a year against Melbourne isn't much of a qualification when discussing a player's merits.

Again, I would question how much people have actually SEEN of Bugg to be so dismissive of him or his ability.

Watching the one fixture a year against Melbourne isn't much of a qualification when discussing a player's merits.

Whoa, hold on there P-man. This is Demonland, where we write off players based on watching a half of football or salivate at their potential... which has never translated at AFL level.

Your complete use of logic is not welcome here!!!

As others have pointed out best 22 is a flawed exercise. (Although admittedly a fun one)

Id love to see some historic stats for how many times a team has taken to the field with their 'best 22'. It would be rare as hens teeth.

That's an excellent point. It's not just about best 22, it's having guys just outside that 22 who can come in and offer significant replacement value.

If you can get away with no drop off from your best 22 (ala Hawthorn), you are on the road to delivering consistent performances.

Only 3.5 more days and then we can drop off Demonland until draft day.

Unless you are doing a daily countdown, in which case you have to check in every day ...

I guess that the point I'm trying to make is that with the list where it now is there is no point recruiting someone who you don't expect to become best 22 and in fact I'd argue that bar a couple of players the list is full of potential "best 22". That has not always been the case.

I think we are playing semantics. You are talking about "Best 22" and I'm talking about players having the ability (and a genuine crack) at becoming best 22. Like you I'm lukewarm on Bugg, think Melksham will be good value for money and think Kennedy clearly is more exciting than the other 2. Taylor was with Collingwood when he was drafted. We rated him very highly in his year (middle top 10 is what I've heard) so their was a body of good footy people who thought he had high level talent. I don't know why he hasn't made it at Collingwood but Taylor, Viney and O'Donnell would. Whether their confidence proves correct is to be seen but I certainly don't have the knowledge to say "poor move".

As for best 22 I'm not really interested. If you've ever done a best 22 at this time of year you'll notice that by the time we've played 4 rounds there are usually about 6 or 7 changes. If you want a team with Bugg and Kennedy in it I'll have them instead of Harmes and Lumumba. I have questions over Harmes tank and level of skill and I don't rate Lumumba. But really, who cares?

James Harmes will be a star!!! ⭐️

James Harmes will be a star!!! ⭐️

Am I completely off the mark when I see glimpses of stevie J.

Haven't noticed his check side skills, but, just a presence about his marking and vision.

Howl me down but, I think Hogan's starting to notice also. Who knows?

James Harmes will be a star!!! ⭐️

Hope you're right.

I guess that the point I'm trying to make is that with the list where it now is there is no point recruiting someone who you don't expect to become best 22 and in fact I'd argue that bar a couple of players the list is full of potential "best 22". That has not always been the case.

I think we are playing semantics. You are talking about "Best 22" and I'm talking about players having the ability (and a genuine crack) at becoming best 22. Like you I'm lukewarm on Bugg, think Melksham will be good value for money and think Kennedy clearly is more exciting than the other 2. Taylor was with Collingwood when he was drafted. We rated him very highly in his year (middle top 10 is what I've heard) so their was a body of good footy people who thought he had high level talent. I don't know why he hasn't made it at Collingwood but Taylor, Viney and O'Donnell would. Whether their confidence proves correct is to be seen but I certainly don't have the knowledge to say "poor move".

As for best 22 I'm not really interested. If you've ever done a best 22 at this time of year you'll notice that by the time we've played 4 rounds there are usually about 6 or 7 changes. If you want a team with Bugg and Kennedy in it I'll have them instead of Harmes and Lumumba. I have questions over Harmes tank and level of skill and I don't rate Lumumba. But really, who cares?

The point I'm making is that I'm ambivalent about two fringe-dwellers and that this is a very underwhelming trade period.

I don't rate Lumumba either, but I suspect he'll be in initial calculations. And they don't replace Harmes, because they're not competing with Harmes.

We backed them in on Newton, Riley and Mitchie. More fringe players.

I always like posting a best 22 as it's interesting and I know clubs project their best 22 too.

In essence, we're trading for depth. Exciting, isn't it ?

I think Kennedy competes with Harmes doesn't he?

I'm with you on excitement level. Last time I was excited was when we got Tyson. It's just about improving the list really.

The point I'm making is that I'm ambivalent about two fringe-dwellers and that this is a very underwhelming trade period.

I don't rate Lumumba either, but I suspect he'll be in initial calculations. And they don't replace Harmes, because they're not competing with Harmes.

We backed them in on Newton, Riley and Mitchie. More fringe players.

I always like posting a best 22 as it's interesting and I know clubs project their best 22 too.

In essence, we're trading for depth. Exciting, isn't it ?

Newton, Riley and Mitchie were cheap options to address in the short term our alarming lack of ball winners.

Edited October 18, 20159 yr by demoniac

Main concern for me this trade period is getting screwed around by Howe on the upgrade from GCS re: pick 6 to pick 3.

Pick 3 would be handy on the back on picks 2&3 last year.

Newton, Riley and Mitchie were cheap options to address in the short term our alarming lack of ball winners.

What do you think Bugg and Kennedy are ?

I think Kennedy competes with Harmes doesn't he?

I'm with you on excitement level. Last time I was excited was when we got Tyson. It's just about improving the list really.

In a fashion. Kennedy is a 175 cm mid, who has excelled in the VFL as a mid, but been played as a small forward/mid at AFL level and struggled. Harmes is a 185 cm forward/mid with excellent pace, who is a terrific contested mark.

I see Kent and JKH competing more with Kennedy than Harmes.

What do you think Bugg and Kennedy are ?

Possibly upgrades on same though this time of year does lend itself to champs/chumps analysis.

Possibly upgrades on same though this time of year does lend itself to champs/chumps analysis.

Glad you're so certain about it.

I share your conviction.

And if either of the above happens then neither of us should do anything - we have no idea how the trades are going to pan out and doing so is short sighted. Howe may be an average player for the Pies while Kennedy kicks on and becomes an important player in our 22.... or vice versa. We won't know for a few years yet.

Mahoney went on radio the other day and said the Howe anf Kennedy deals would have to be done separately. If we then trade Howe for Kennedy and some backended picks then it tells me Mahoney doesn't know how to negotiate.

Mahoney went on radio the other day and said the Howe anf Kennedy deals would have to be done separately. If we then trade Howe for Kennedy and some backended picks then it tells me Mahoney doesn't know how to negotiate.

I think you are confused between knowing how to negotiate and knowing when to take a good deal. The idea to separate the higher valued player from the lower valued player is good negotiation.

The first thing we have to do with Howe is get a benchmark value for him and get Collingwood to offer a reasonable deal. If we end up converting that deal to one for Kennedy and picks then that's fine as long as the picks are decent.

If we want Kennedy and they want Howe then it's fine that they end up in the same trade eventually. Keeping them separate is just important until we get value for Howe.

In a fashion. Kennedy is a 175 cm mid, who has excelled in the VFL as a mid, but been played as a small forward/mid at AFL level and struggled. Harmes is a 185 cm forward/mid with excellent pace, who is a terrific contested mark.

I see Kent and JKH competing more with Kennedy than Harmes.

Is Harmes even signed for next year yet??? I guess we are waiting to see how everything shakes out but he's one I would like to see upgraded and signed.

I reckon he offers more than a few of the fan favourites on this site.

Is Harmes even signed for next year yet??? I guess we are waiting to see how everything shakes out but he's one I would like to see upgraded and signed.

I reckon he offers more than a few of the fan favourites on this site.

geez I hope so. would be far more stressed about losing him given his glimpses late last season compared to Howe.

I hope this non trying [censored] is at Collingwood today so this crap ends!