1 hour ago, rjay said:

My point is that to date Salem has been disappointing, he needs to lift to make this trade a win for us. That's nothing to do with hindsight.

...and remember hindsight or not pick 20 was part of the deal, it wasn't 2 for one. Salem at current output is not a pick 20 player.

Salem to date has been disappointing?

His equivalents at stronger clubs would not have had to play him so much in his early couple of years. 

The beginning to his career has been solid and the fact that he has been dropped has less to do with his drop in form and more to do with the team's increase in form, and talent, and standards, and expectations.

Salem, has had a disappointing 2 months, that's it.

I still think Salem is being played out of position, i reckon he's a mid/forward, and not a very good defender, but our lack of quality kicks has kind of landed him on the half back line.

2 hours ago, martin said:

Really do think we missed one in Kelly. Precise kicking and raking left foot make him special. Having said that,much easier to play in a team flying like GWS. Yes, Tyson is playing well but the jury is still out. Best to come for Salem methinks. The point Barrett and all else seem to forget is that we gave up pick 20 also in this trade.Sadly, I think we're well behind ATM.

Why is the jury still out on Tyson but not on Kelly?

2 hours ago, rjay said:

It's fair enough to bring it up, he's been dubious about the trade from the start.

We traded picks 2, 20 & 72 for Tyson, Salem (pick 9) and Michie (pick 53)

They picked up Kelly, McCarthy (trading on pick 20 & some other deals) and passed on 72, Kelly is a win and McCarthy has disappeared but will probably give them another high draft pick.

With pick 2 we could have taken Billings, Bont, Cripps to name a few and at pick 20 Matt Crouch and Billy Hartung were available to name a couple.

Tyson has been good but Salem no matter which way you look at it has been disappointing, Viv is at the crossroads...

In hindsight we could have had Cripps and Hartung, now that's not the point I'm raising here.

The real point is for the trade to be a winner we need a lot more from Salem and at present he's way off the mark.

All the players mentioned above at other clubs have started to make their mark with the exception of McCarthy who had...Hartung is still in and out but would be a walk up and what we need at our club.

No point shooting down Barrett on this one...to date he is probably right, well part right...I'm still happy to have Tyson but we could have got him with one pick.

That's complete tripe rjay. Just because he's out of form right now (and potentially you're upset we did the deal) doesn't mean he's been disappointing "no matter which way you look at it".

He's being asked to play a position he didn't grow up playing because he was drafted to a club with pathetic foot skills, forcing Roos to put him on half-back. There's no doubt he has a lot of things to work on but he has, in his 2.25 years of football (yes, less than 2.5 years into his AFL career), already showed development into a role he wasn't supposed to play.

10 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Salem to date has been disappointing?

His equivalents at stronger clubs would not have had to play him so much in his early couple of years. 

The beginning to his career has been solid and the fact that he has been dropped has less to do with his drop in form and more to do with the team's increase in form, and talent, and standards, and expectations.

Salem, has had a disappointing 2 months, that's it.

Games played by the top 30 drafted in his draft year...I think he has a lot to offer but I worry about his game sense...needs a few 30 + possession games at Casey.

1	1		GWS	Thomas Boyd	Western Bulldogs	27
1	2		GWS	Joshua Kelly	GWS	44
1	3		St Kilda	Jack Billings	St Kilda	33
1	4		Western Bulldogs	Marcus Bontempelli	Western Bulldogs	45
1	5		Gold Coast	Kade Kolodjashnij	Gold Coast	47
1	6		Collingwood	Matthew Scharenberg	Collingwood	4
1	7		Brisbane	James Aish	Collingwood	37
1	8	Father/Son	North Melbourne	Luke McDonald	North Melbourne	45
1	9		Melbourne	Christian Salem	Melbourne	29
1	10		Collingwood	Nathan Freeman	St Kilda	0
1	11		West Coast	Dominic Sheed	West Coast	33
1	12		Richmond	Ben Lennon	Richmond	18
1	13		Carlton	Patrick Cripps	Carlton	30
1	14		GWS	Cameron McCarthy	GWS	21
1	15		Sydney	Zak Jones	Sydney	21
1	16		Geelong	Darcy Lang	Geelong	28
1	17		Fremantle	Michael Apeness	Fremantle	2
1	18		St Kilda	Luke Dunstan	St Kilda	42
1	19		St Kilda	Blake Acres	St Kilda	15
1	20		Gold Coast	Jack Leslie	Gold Coast	6
2	21		Port Adelaide	Jarman Impey	Port Adelaide	41
2	22		Brisbane	Darcy Gardiner	Brisbane	33
2	23		Adelaide	Matt Crouch	Adelaide	33
2	24		Hawthorn	Billy Hartung	Hawthorn	34
2	25		Brisbane	Daniel McStay	Brisbane	34
2	26		Essendon	Zachary Merrett	Essendon	45
2	27		Gold Coast	Sean Lemmens	Gold Coast	44
2	28		Brisbane	Lewis Taylor	Brisbane	51
2	29		GWS	Rory Lobb	GWS	19
2	30		North Melbourne	Trent Dumont	North Melbourne	8
2

1 minute ago, titan_uranus said:

 

That's complete tripe rjay. Just because he's out of form right now (and potentially you're upset we did the deal) doesn't mean he's been disappointing "no matter which way you look at it".

He's being asked to play a position he didn't grow up playing because he was drafted to a club with pathetic foot skills, forcing Roos to put him on half-back. There's no doubt he has a lot of things to work on but he has, in his 2.25 years of football (yes, less than 2.5 years into his AFL career), already showed development into a role he wasn't supposed to play.

Most of the good kids at u18 level are asked to play a different position, it's no excuse...not everyone can be a mid.

We still rate some of our kids way too highly here on limited output,  they haven't proven they can or cannot play good consistent footy yet.

I'm not at all upset we did the deal, I just think too many are jumping on Barrett and at the moment and he has a point.

...by the way I am a big Tyson fan and happy to have him on board.

Not tripe, just an opinion. Obviously a different one to yours and most others but I will stand by it.

Just now, rjay said:

Games played by the top 30 drafted in his draft year...I think he has a lot to offer but I worry about his game sense...needs a few 30 + possession games at Casey.

1	1		GWS	Thomas Boyd	Western Bulldogs	27
1	2		GWS	Joshua Kelly	GWS	44
1	3		St Kilda	Jack Billings	St Kilda	33
1	4		Western Bulldogs	Marcus Bontempelli	Western Bulldogs	45
1	5		Gold Coast	Kade Kolodjashnij	Gold Coast	47
1	6		Collingwood	Matthew Scharenberg	Collingwood	4
1	7		Brisbane	James Aish	Collingwood	37
1	8	Father/Son	North Melbourne	Luke McDonald	North Melbourne	45
1	9		Melbourne	Christian Salem	Melbourne	29
1	10		Collingwood	Nathan Freeman	St Kilda	0
1	11		West Coast	Dominic Sheed	West Coast	33
1	12		Richmond	Ben Lennon	Richmond	18
1	13		Carlton	Patrick Cripps	Carlton	30
1	14		GWS	Cameron McCarthy	GWS	21
1	15		Sydney	Zak Jones	Sydney	21
1	16		Geelong	Darcy Lang	Geelong	28
1	17		Fremantle	Michael Apeness	Fremantle	2
1	18		St Kilda	Luke Dunstan	St Kilda	42
1	19		St Kilda	Blake Acres	St Kilda	15
1	20		Gold Coast	Jack Leslie	Gold Coast	6
2	21		Port Adelaide	Jarman Impey	Port Adelaide	41
2	22		Brisbane	Darcy Gardiner	Brisbane	33
2	23		Adelaide	Matt Crouch	Adelaide	33
2	24		Hawthorn	Billy Hartung	Hawthorn	34
2	25		Brisbane	Daniel McStay	Brisbane	34
2	26		Essendon	Zachary Merrett	Essendon	45
2	27		Gold Coast	Sean Lemmens	Gold Coast	44
2	28		Brisbane	Lewis Taylor	Brisbane	51
2	29		GWS	Rory Lobb	GWS	19
2	30		North Melbourne	Trent Dumont	North Melbourne	8
2

Most of the good kids at u18 level are asked to play a different position, it's no excuse...not everyone can be a mid.

We still rate some of our kids way too highly here on limited output,  they haven't proven they can or cannot play good consistent footy yet.

I'm not at all upset we did the deal, I just think too many are jumping on Barrett and at the moment and he has a point.

...by the way I am a big Tyson fan and happy to have him on board.

Not tripe, just an opinion. Obviously a different one to yours and most others but I will stand by it.

It's a tripe opinion, to say that there's no way to look at Salem to date other than as a disappointment.

He's less than 2.5 years into his career and has played 29 games. In that time we've seen him dominate off half-back (not regularly, sure), we've seen him develop strong foot skills (certainly a class above at least half the rest of the team), he's worked on, and improved, the defensive side to his game and he's tried (not perfectly) to build the contested ball side to things. Clearly those last two areas need work and I'm sure they factor into him being dropped but there have been more than mere glimpses of quality in his 29 games to date and I cannot accept any argument which suggests it's been nothing but disappointment so far from a 20-year old, 29-game, 2.25-year kid. 

42 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

It's a tripe opinion, to say that there's no way to look at Salem to date other than as a disappointment.

He's less than 2.5 years into his career and has played 29 games. In that time we've seen him dominate off half-back (not regularly, sure), we've seen him develop strong foot skills (certainly a class above at least half the rest of the team), he's worked on, and improved, the defensive side to his game and he's tried (not perfectly) to build the contested ball side to things. Clearly those last two areas need work and I'm sure they factor into him being dropped but there have been more than mere glimpses of quality in his 29 games to date and I cannot accept any argument which suggests it's been nothing but disappointment so far from a 20-year old, 29-game, 2.25-year kid. 

For a start I didn't say he's been nothing but disappointing...he's actually quite promising but is not doing enough and has some flaws that concern me, one in particular but I'm sure it will be addressed and is a big part of why he is back at Casey.

...but lets look at your analysis of his game which I think is incorrect.

I can't remember him ever dominating a game off half back.

His foot skills have always been above average, it's not something he's had to work at. The kid has the skills, he just needed to settle into the AFL game tempo and in this area he's ok.

The defensive side of his game is poor because he doesn't read the game well, he seems to be a thought behind his opponent at times. This was really obvious in the first game against GWS where he was outplayed not by an experienced AFL player but his old schoolmate Kelly.

I'm not worried about him at the contest, he's hard at the ball when he's around it and he does lay a good tackle. His baby face look can be deceiving but he is a competitor.

He needs to find more ball, he puts himself in the wrong positions too often, his awareness is good and sometimes exceptional when he has the ball in hand, not so good when it's not.

I think he's back at Casey to get more ball and learn a bit more about the game. We need his foot skills but they are of no value if he can't find the ball.

edit: I think he should be further along the road in his development that's all, I'm not hanging him, just disappointed we're not getting more value from him.

Edited May 20, 20169 yr by rjay

On 5/20/2016 at 10:40 PM, rjay said:

For a start I didn't say he's been nothing but disappointing...he's actually quite promising but is not doing enough and has some flaws that concern me, one in particular but I'm sure it will be addressed and is a big part of why he is back at Casey.

...but lets look at your analysis of his game which I think is incorrect.

I can't remember him ever dominating a game off half back.

His foot skills have always been above average, it's not something he's had to work at. The kid has the skills, he just needed to settle into the AFL game tempo and in this area he's ok.

The defensive side of his game is poor because he doesn't read the game well, he seems to be a thought behind his opponent at times. This was really obvious in the first game against GWS where he was outplayed not by an experienced AFL player but his old schoolmate Kelly.

I'm not worried about him at the contest, he's hard at the ball when he's around it and he does lay a good tackle. His baby face look can be deceiving but he is a competitor.

He needs to find more ball, he puts himself in the wrong positions too often, his awareness is good and sometimes exceptional when he has the ball in hand, not so good when it's not.

I think he's back at Casey to get more ball and learn a bit more about the game. We need his foot skills but they are of no value if he can't find the ball.

edit: I think he should be further along the road in his development that's all, I'm not hanging him, just disappointed we're not getting more value from him.

Do you think he's a HBF Rjay? or would you play him further up the field?

 

If you're still bitter about being called out for not rating a player you later admit you'd never seen play...........

.........then you need to build a [censored] bridge and get over it, because you were dead wrong, and time will prove it.

Just now, Peter Griffen said:

Do you think he's a HBF Rjay? or would you play him further up the field?

 

There's nothing wrong with him playing HB and he played a bit of time starting from the wing on the weekend. I don't think he's a natural forward though.

Running him from behind the ball is as good a spot for him as any at the moment. I would like to see him make position and demand the ball a bit more, but as others have said he is still young in football years.

On 5/20/2016 at 10:55 PM, rjay said:

There's nothing wrong with him playing HB and he played a bit of time starting from the wing on the weekend. I don't think he's a natural forward though.

Running him from behind the ball is as good a spot for him as any at the moment. I would like to see him make position and demand the ball a bit more, but as others have said he is still young in football years.

I personally think he's a far more natural forward, he's got a real creative flare to his play and there is no doubt the coaching staff were hoping he'd produce that out of defense, but i don't feel he has. 

I think Angus Brayshaw would be a better bet rotating from Wing to half back, as good as he is as an inside mid.

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Why is the jury still out on Tyson but not on Kelly?

That's complete tripe rjay. Just because he's out of form right now (and potentially you're upset we did the deal) doesn't mean he's been disappointing "no matter which way you look at it".

He's being asked to play a position he didn't grow up playing because he was drafted to a club with pathetic foot skills, forcing Roos to put him on half-back. There's no doubt he has a lot of things to work on but he has, in his 2.25 years of football (yes, less than 2.5 years into his AFL career), already showed development into a role he wasn't supposed to play.

Kelly can kick,Tyson very average.

46 minutes ago, rjay said:

For a start I didn't say he's been nothing but disappointing...he's actually quite promising but is not doing enough and has some flaws that concern me, one in particular but I'm sure it will be addressed and is a big part of why he is back at Casey.

...but lets look at your analysis of his game which I think is incorrect.

I can't remember him ever dominating a game off half back.

His foot skills have always been above average, it's not something he's had to work at. The kid has the skills, he just needed to settle into the AFL game tempo and in this area he's ok.

The defensive side of his game is poor because he doesn't read the game well, he seems to be a thought behind his opponent at times. This was really obvious in the first game against GWS where he was outplayed not by an experienced AFL player but his old schoolmate Kelly.

I'm not worried about him at the contest, he's hard at the ball when he's around it and he does lay a good tackle. His baby face look can be deceiving but he is a competitor.

He needs to find more ball, he puts himself in the wrong positions too often, his awareness is good and sometimes exceptional when he has the ball in hand, not so good when it's not.

I think he's back at Casey to get more ball and learn a bit more about the game. We need his foot skills but they are of no value if he can't find the ball.

edit: I think he should be further along the road in his development that's all, I'm not hanging him, just disappointed we're not getting more value from him.

Your comment was "Salem no matter which way you look at it has been disappointing".

Looks like you don't actually believe that based on the above.

He's a young player who, like the majority of young players, is going to have ups and downs. Right now he's down more than he is up, and that's based largely on what you've identified (not getting enough of the ball, poor defensive positioning). But there is plenty to like and a lot to work with.

40 minutes ago, Peter Griffen said:

Do you think he's a HBF Rjay? or would you play him further up the field?

I understand he was told pre-season the plan is for him to move into the midfield. Not sure when that is supposed to happen though.

4 hours ago, rjay said:

It's fair enough to bring it up, he's been dubious about the trade from the start.

We traded picks 2, 20 & 72 for Tyson, Salem (pick 9) and Michie (pick 53)

They picked up Kelly, McCarthy (trading on pick 20 & some other deals) and passed on 72, Kelly is a win and McCarthy has disappeared but will probably give them another high draft pick.

With pick 2 we could have taken Billings, Bont, Cripps to name a few and at pick 20 Matt Crouch and Billy Hartung were available to name a couple.

Tyson has been good but Salem no matter which way you look at it has been disappointing, Viv is at the crossroads...

In hindsight we could have had Cripps and Hartung, now that's not the point I'm raising here.

The real point is for the trade to be a winner we need a lot more from Salem and at present he's way off the mark.

All the players mentioned above at other clubs have started to make their mark with the exception of McCarthy who had...Hartung is still in and out but would be a walk up and what we need at our club.

No point shooting down Barrett on this one...to date he is probably right, well part right...I'm still happy to have Tyson but we could have got him with one pick.

I agree with most of what you say, but bringing up Cripps in the pick 2 discussion is a strange point. We could have had him at 9.

2 hours ago, Peter Griffen said:

I still think Salem is being played out of position, i reckon he's a mid/forward, and not a very good defender, but our lack of quality kicks has kind of landed him on the half back line.

Agreed, mate.

53 minutes ago, martin said:

Kelly can kick,Tyson very average.

Kelly plays on the outside, Tyson plays in the heat. Totally different players. Average post, Marty.

On 5/20/2016 at 11:31 PM, titan_uranus said:

Your comment was "Salem no matter which way you look at it has been disappointing".

Looks like you don't actually believe that based on the above.

He's a young player who, like the majority of young players, is going to have ups and downs. Right now he's down more than he is up, and that's based largely on what you've identified (not getting enough of the ball, poor defensive positioning). But there is plenty to like and a lot to work with.

I understand he was told pre-season the plan is for him to move into the midfield. Not sure when that is supposed to happen though.

He still to me doesn't look like he has the running capacity to play as a genuine outside midfielder, but i really hope he does, he has the class and skills that we're desperately lacking. 

At least we didn't pick Scharenberg and Freeman....

7 hours ago, MrReims said:

At least we didn't pick Scharenberg and Freeman....

Or Aish or Lennon

11 hours ago, rjay said:

Games played by the top 30 drafted in his draft year...I think he has a lot to offer but I worry about his game sense...needs a few 30 + possession games at Casey.

1	1		GWS	Thomas Boyd	Western Bulldogs	27
1	2		GWS	Joshua Kelly	GWS	44
1	3		St Kilda	Jack Billings	St Kilda	33
1	4		Western Bulldogs	Marcus Bontempelli	Western Bulldogs	45
1	5		Gold Coast	Kade Kolodjashnij	Gold Coast	47
1	6		Collingwood	Matthew Scharenberg	Collingwood	4
1	7		Brisbane	James Aish	Collingwood	37
1	8	Father/Son	North Melbourne	Luke McDonald	North Melbourne	45
1	9		Melbourne	Christian Salem	Melbourne	29
1	10		Collingwood	Nathan Freeman	St Kilda	0
1	11		West Coast	Dominic Sheed	West Coast	33
1	12		Richmond	Ben Lennon	Richmond	18
1	13		Carlton	Patrick Cripps	Carlton	30
1	14		GWS	Cameron McCarthy	GWS	21
1	15		Sydney	Zak Jones	Sydney	21
1	16		Geelong	Darcy Lang	Geelong	28
1	17		Fremantle	Michael Apeness	Fremantle	2
1	18		St Kilda	Luke Dunstan	St Kilda	42
1	19		St Kilda	Blake Acres	St Kilda	15
1	20		Gold Coast	Jack Leslie	Gold Coast	6
2	21		Port Adelaide	Jarman Impey	Port Adelaide	41
2	22		Brisbane	Darcy Gardiner	Brisbane	33
2	23		Adelaide	Matt Crouch	Adelaide	33
2	24		Hawthorn	Billy Hartung	Hawthorn	34
2	25		Brisbane	Daniel McStay	Brisbane	34
2	26		Essendon	Zachary Merrett	Essendon	45
2	27		Gold Coast	Sean Lemmens	Gold Coast	44
2	28		Brisbane	Lewis Taylor	Brisbane	51
2	29		GWS	Rory Lobb	GWS	19
2	30		North Melbourne	Trent Dumont	North Melbourne	8
2

Most of the good kids at u18 level are asked to play a different position, it's no excuse...not everyone can be a mid.

We still rate some of our kids way too highly here on limited output,  they haven't proven they can or cannot play good consistent footy yet.

I'm not at all upset we did the deal, I just think too many are jumping on Barrett and at the moment and he has a point.

...by the way I am a big Tyson fan and happy to have him on board.

Not tripe, just an opinion. Obviously a different one to yours and most others but I will stand by it.

Geez there are some good players in that draft.

 

8 hours ago, Peter Griffen said:

He still to me doesn't look like he has the running capacity to play as a genuine outside midfielder, but i really hope he does, he has the class and skills that we're desperately lacking. 

Also take in to consideration that H has struggled to get on the park, Garland has been a liability most of the time, and we've also blooded 2 new blokes off the HBF too.  Salem's time in the middle will come, and he will be a very good player.

It says a lot about the kid that Roos had elected him to be the "general" of our backline.  Yes, he has been dropped this week, and will likely spend a couple of weeks at Casey, but I'm sure Roos/Goodwin are looking forward to the day that he hits 60+ games.  His current situation (i.e. being dropped) is all good from my end, and will be a very important part of his development.

In no way did we lose in this trade.  Not saying we won, but we definitely didn't lose.  Tyson's worth to us is far greater than what many outsiders would appreciate (and some of our own supporters, too).  I'm constantly amazed at the calls that he was out of form last year.  It wasn't form, it was injury.  Don't think there was any game where he was 100%.

The purpose of this trade was to bring in a midfielder further in to his development. Just like the deal that saw us giving away this year's first round pick for Oliver (or was it Weideman?), the purpose was to fast track our midfield development. I don't think Tyson has to be as good as the player taken at two (Kelly) or any of the other players we took between there and Salem at 9 for it to have been a success. Tyson immediately made our midfield better, which was the goal; we didn't have to wait years for the trade to bear fruit. Certainly it would have been possible to draft a player who immediately made us better (Bont), but history shows you have to be very lucky to get that kind of result. It's trading an unknown for a solid known: forget Kelly or Bont; we could just have easily have drafted Scharenberg. Imagine the sliding doors topic then.

I wholly disagree with rjay's assertion that Salem is not a pick 20 worthy player. History shows that as many players in the 10-20 range completely flop as they do forge a career, and you get very few gun players in that range. Salem has the tools to become a decent player, and I'm pretty confident he will. That would be a better than average result for a pick 20, which was essentially the price.

Kelly is a gun. But I'd probably take the Bont or Cripps over him. Does Barrett think GWS erred in this respect?

Or does he just want to limit his view to hanging carp on us? Nasher has summed up the purpose of this trade from our perspective, something that dolt seems not to comprehend. Salem and Tyson are long-term best 22 players for us, and our list ain't bad.

 

2 hours ago, Nasher said:

I wholly disagree with rjay's assertion that Salem is not a pick 20 worthy player. History shows that as many players in the 10-20 range completely flop as they do forge a career, and you get very few gun players in that range. Salem has the tools to become a decent player, and I'm pretty confident he will. That would be a better than average result for a pick 20, which was essentially the price.

I didn't say he's not a pick 20 worthy player 'Nasher' just that to date he's not...

...he has some of the tools, needs to add a few more to the bag.

13 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

..............................................  I understand he was told pre-season the plan is for him to move into the midfield. Not sure when that is supposed to happen though.

When he builds a bigger tank will have a fair bit to do with it, I suspect.  An injury-free pre season might be what's needed.

15 hours ago, rjay said:

Games played by the top 30 drafted in his draft year...I think he has a lot to offer but I worry about his game sense...needs a few 30 + possession games at Casey.

1	1		GWS	Thomas Boyd	Western Bulldogs	27
1	2		GWS	Joshua Kelly	GWS	44
1	3		St Kilda	Jack Billings	St Kilda	33
1	4		Western Bulldogs	Marcus Bontempelli	Western Bulldogs	45
1	5		Gold Coast	Kade Kolodjashnij	Gold Coast	47
1	6		Collingwood	Matthew Scharenberg	Collingwood	4
1	7		Brisbane	James Aish	Collingwood	37
1	8	Father/Son	North Melbourne	Luke McDonald	North Melbourne	45
1	9		Melbourne	Christian Salem	Melbourne	29
1	10		Collingwood	Nathan Freeman	St Kilda	0
1	11		West Coast	Dominic Sheed	West Coast	33
1	12		Richmond	Ben Lennon	Richmond	18
1	13		Carlton	Patrick Cripps	Carlton	30
1	14		GWS	Cameron McCarthy	GWS	21
1	15		Sydney	Zak Jones	Sydney	21
1	16		Geelong	Darcy Lang	Geelong	28
1	17		Fremantle	Michael Apeness	Fremantle	2
1	18		St Kilda	Luke Dunstan	St Kilda	42
1	19		St Kilda	Blake Acres	St Kilda	15
1	20		Gold Coast	Jack Leslie	Gold Coast	6
2	21		Port Adelaide	Jarman Impey	Port Adelaide	41
2	22		Brisbane	Darcy Gardiner	Brisbane	33
2	23		Adelaide	Matt Crouch	Adelaide	33
2	24		Hawthorn	Billy Hartung	Hawthorn	34
2	25		Brisbane	Daniel McStay	Brisbane	34
2	26		Essendon	Zachary Merrett	Essendon	45
2	27		Gold Coast	Sean Lemmens	Gold Coast	44
2	28		Brisbane	Lewis Taylor	Brisbane	51
2	29		GWS	Rory Lobb	GWS	19
2	30		North Melbourne	Trent Dumont	North Melbourne	8
2

Most of the good kids at u18 level are asked to play a different position, it's no excuse...not everyone can be a mid.

We still rate some of our kids way too highly here on limited output,  they haven't proven they can or cannot play good consistent footy yet.

I'm not at all upset we did the deal, I just think too many are jumping on Barrett and at the moment and he has a point.

...by the way I am a big Tyson fan and happy to have him on board.

Not tripe, just an opinion. Obviously a different one to yours and most others but I will stand by it.

Could have had Freeman and apeness. You're arguments really poor here.