4 hours ago, Redleg said:

I think it was Barrett, or maybe King, who slammed us in the Kelly for Tyson and Salem deal, saying we had traded away a Brownlow medallist.

I know it is only one game, but stats for Kelly in a 15 goal win, were 17 disposals and 1 goal with 5 tackles, while Tyson in a 6 goal win was 24 disposals, 2 goals and 6 tackles and Salem 20 disposals and 5 tackles.

Seems we are doing well out of that trade so far.

BTW, Kelly doesn't look like a Brownlow medallist to me, on the games I have seen him play, both against us and other teams.

As Taylor Swift sings, "Haters gonna Hate".

OK, I am sick of seeing this argument so I am going to pull you up. 

We have publicly stated we would not have taken Kelly with this pick. My guess would be, it was Billings, who is a class above Salem. 

We also traded pick 20 as part of this trade, there were some really handy players who went between 20 and 30 in this draft.

This is not the greatest trade of all time, like some will have you believe on this site. 

Your point that Barrett has no idea still stands.

There's got to be about 15 other players from GWS I'd rather have than Kelly at this point. Their depth is horrifying.

2 hours ago, Watts the matter said:

OK, I am sick of seeing this argument so I am going to pull you up. 

We have publicly stated we would not have taken Kelly with this pick. My guess would be, it was Billings, who is a class above Salem. 

We also traded pick 20 as part of this trade, there were some really handy players who went between 20 and 30 in this draft.

This is not the greatest trade of all time, like some will have you believe on this site. 

Your point that Barrett has no idea still stands.

And we could have got Sicily at 56, one before Hunt....

You're right though, and all of Hartung, Zach Merrett and Matt Crouch were there.

And Rory Lobb would have sorted out our ruck problem...

So, Billings and Lobb/Crouch or Tyson and Salem? It's genuinely a tough one.

7 hours ago, Watts the matter said:

OK, I am sick of seeing this argument so I am going to pull you up. 

We have publicly stated we would not have taken Kelly with this pick. My guess would be, it was Billings, who is a class above Salem. 

We also traded pick 20 as part of this trade, there were some really handy players who went between 20 and 30 in this draft.

This is not the greatest trade of all time, like some will have you believe on this site. 

Your point that Barrett has no idea still stands.

Dom Tyson, NDS 9 (Christian Salem) & NDS 57 (Jayden Hunt), traded by GWS for NDS 2 (Josh Kelly), NDS 22 (Darcy Gardiner) &  NDS 72 (Pass)

What gets forgotten in the discussion about the Tyson/Salem/Kelly deal is that the value is not just about the player's skill but the number of games played with that skill. The equation that matters is whether Tyson's average output times games played plus Salem's average output times games played is equal or better than Kelly's average output times games played. 

Unless injuries intervene, it's pretty hard for me to see how Melbourne is going to lose on that metric. It seems likely that all of Tyson, Salem and Kelly will play (say) 200 games each. So unless Tyson's and Salem's average output is half or less than Kelly's, Melbourne will win. 

 

What a lot of people don't get with Tyson is that his boyish good looks camouflage a very tough, competitive and driven individual. It has been noted before that he refuses to give off simply because he is being tackled. He only gives off if he sees a positive option. Quite a few of the frees paid against him could quite easily have the "no prior opportunity" rule applied. He takes the heat. He doesn't mind body contact and he is cool and composed under pressure. He is an accomplished inside mid, who can take a grab, gets some distance by hoof, and has shown he can nail a set shot (although his percentages can improve). All this in a relatively young man who could be a Demon for another decade. Where's the downside?

1 hour ago, waynewussell said:

What a lot of people don't get with Tyson is that his boyish good looks camouflage a very tough, competitive and driven individual. It has been noted before that he refuses to give off simply because he is being tackled. He only gives off if he sees a positive option. Quite a few of the frees paid against him could quite easily have the "no prior opportunity" rule applied. He takes the heat. He doesn't mind body contact and he is cool and composed under pressure. He is an accomplished inside mid, who can take a grab, gets some distance by hoof, and has shown he can nail a set shot (although his percentages can improve). All this in a relatively young man who could be a Demon for another decade. Where's the downside?

I agree. We have all questioned Tyson's foot skills but he has always been a competitive beast

he was a player Roosy wanted for good reason...

Edited April 20, 20169 yr by Sir Why You Little

He cops heat for his disposal by foot but can negotiate heavy traffic really well, and will risk a HTB to get a stoppage. He's only going to get better and better.

34 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

He cops heat for his disposal by foot but can negotiate heavy traffic really well, and will risk a HTB to get a stoppage. He's only going to get better and better.

Many critics (myself included), forget that he has only played 54 games.

His first year at the club was phenomenal, and many would rightly think he has stalled or gone backwards since then. But he is still in a developmental stage of his career, learning how to deal with tags and added pressure. 

His first year clearly showed he has the talent, and with improved development coaching now in place, i have no doubt he is on the right track.

On 4/15/2016 at 3:06 PM, Akum said:

Suppositories??

The doc told me to take these suppositories

But for all the good they did me 

i may as well have shoved em up my arse

Barrett's 'Sliding Doors' opinion piece he puts out each week is quite simply, pathetic.

I read it just to get a weekly fix of cringe.

Merchant banker it is.

On 4/18/2016 at 5:30 PM, daisycutter said:

he's a bit like you then, ernest, just writes fiction  when he's sozzled 

It is rare you get one wrong - but you are wrong here - Writing fiction whilst sozzled is Robbo not Barrett.

13 minutes ago, nutbean said:

It is rare you get one wrong - but you are wrong here - Writing fiction whilst sozzled is Robbo not Barrett.

well picked up nut. i realised i got my villains mixed up just after i posted and hoped no-one noticed

you win the demonland eagle-eye award for the week

(although for all we know purple could be a closet boozer)