Are we better after trade period?

[rjay 23,922]

50 minutes ago, martin said:

Whilst Grimes, Dunn, Terlich, Michie, Jones, Newton and Dawes were not particularly up to AFL standard in the end, they were significant contributors in a strong Casey outfit. Added to that, given there is a chance that Smith and/or Keilty might get some senior action, it is a group that is hard to replace. McInerney further weakens the equation. Whilst positive for the Demons, the jury is out on Filopovic, Hannan, Johnstone and, to some extent McKenna. Don't get me wrong. I think the club has done a magnificent job with the comings and goings - wouldn't have kept one Casey delist. Good outcome for Melbourne, not so good for the Scorpions.

Dawes played very few games at Casey, so I wouldn't count his contribution.

Maynard will add a lot to Casey this year as will the improvement of Smith and I see King being a much better prospect than Mcinnerney plus we have Filipovic in the wings.

Grimes and Michie were terrific contributors last season and will take some replacing but the new signings should cover them.

Who knows what role injury will play this season coming but...

I think the Scorps will be ok.

[The Chazz 4,077]

2 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Grimes - 2 games, 1 good, 1 bad, never factored again. 2 mediocre games. From an AFL perspective the bar is very low to replace their output. Both were good players at VFL level but so was Hannan - despite limited training, and McKenna had a solid season in the NEAFL and should be above average in the VFL.

The VFL is of superior quality when comparing it to the NEAFL.  Also, if you have a look at Grimes' stats for the year in the VFL, you will see he's had a far better year than what McKenna did.

What McKenna does have on his side is age and (no) baggage, so hopefully at the end of this season, we will agree that McKenna added more than what Grimes would've.  But to rank McKenna equal to Grimes is just plain wrong at this stage.

Newton had a frustrating year with injury, but his best at this stage is far better than Hannan's.  It's not to say that Hannan won't be a better pick up, nor McKenna for that matter.

[The Chazz 4,077]

2 hours ago, praha said:

They're both still playing AFL?

I can assure you of one thing, Praha, there are players on our list, and every other list in the AFL, that won't be playing AFL next year.

Let's also not forget that while Grimes and Newton are no longer on an AFL list, their "replacements" haven't played a senior game between them, and one is a rookie who will need some things go his way before he's able to play at the top level (should his form warrant it).

[Dee-licious 1,800]

Casey's strength is going to depend on who they pick up and our injury list. If H plays 22(?) games for Casey, then they are going to have a really good injection of VFL class there. If he doesnt come back, then there is a question of which VFL player is going to come in and play in that spot. I'm hoping that we are already talking to Hamish Brayshaw about playing for Casey next year. Xav Richards would be another I'd like to see down at Casey. 

We do always have a little new draftee bias and lets face it, Grimes and Michie dominated at VFL level; but do they make the AFL team stronger when they were unable to have an impact this year on it? Again, we dont know what our new draftees can do yet once they are in a system. 

Melksham is the one that is really interesting because he is a new draftee for us (same age as Tim Smith) and could take his game to the next level or just do a Kennedy and bob between Casey and Melbourne. 

I think we are a stronger AFL side after trade and draft because of Lewis, Hibbard and Melksham. I'm just glad that for the first time in a decade we are not all talking about how much stronger we are because we added an 18 year old first rounder. We can take 12 months off and then get excited about one again. 

On another point, gear up for the 2017 free agency class. While Fyfe and Martin arent linked to us, there is Trengove (PA), Rockcliff, and Reid (Syd) on the table which might be of some interest. 

 

[DeeSpencer 23,148]

26 minutes ago, billy2803 said:

The VFL is of superior quality when comparing it to the NEAFL.  Also, if you have a look at Grimes' stats for the year in the VFL, you will see he's had a far better year than what McKenna did.

What McKenna does have on his side is age and (no) baggage, so hopefully at the end of this season, we will agree that McKenna added more than what Grimes would've.  But to rank McKenna equal to Grimes is just plain wrong at this stage.

Newton had a frustrating year with injury, but his best at this stage is far better than Hannan's.  It's not to say that Hannan won't be a better pick up, nor McKenna for that matter.

Yep that's fair. Just saying the new guys don't have to do much at all to equal the AFL output and both can perform at VFL level. If the ranking is based on projected AFL output I don't mind it and I don't really care about VFL output really. I don't care if our players are dominating in the VFL as long as they are doing ok and progressing towards becoming AFL players. 

[DeeZone 7,773]

Have we improved our bottom six and added depth to our overall list, I believe that we have and significantly. Injuries aside we are already a better team than we were at Round 23. That's a great result. Go Dee's!!!!

[beelzebub 22,225]

1 hour ago, DeeZone said:

Have we improved our bottom six and added depth to our overall list, I believe that we have and significantly. Injuries aside we are already a better team than we were at Round 23. That's a great result. Go Dee's!!!!

good aspect !!  the best one almost

[Lil_red_fire_engine 10,193]

The simple way of looking at it is we have added 3 players I expect are walk up best 22. We have not lost any player who was walk up best 22. Our depth past spot 30 will lack maturity but will likely be better in quality if called on occasionally. Additionally the additions to the list bring a more balanced mix of positions in my view than what we had prior. 

Edited November 29, 2016 by big_red_fire_engine

[Pates 9,537]

After years of doing the trade/draft period for the future this is the first time in a very long to we have trade/draft period where success will be almost entirely based on short term results. 

I would definitely rate it as a period in which we have improved the list with adding experience from Lewis, Hibberd, and throwing Melksham in there as well. 

Weve cut from our list players that I felt were safe options but not going to take us anywhere, and we've certainly handed over the reigns to the new generation of the MFC. 

I think finals is a genuine chance in 2017, 100% has to be the aim. Kangaroos are going to be almost a certainty to drop out so that's once place up for grabs while I also feel West Coast could be vulnerable. 

With Lewis in there it immediately adds grunt and experience to the midfield which will only be positives for Viney, Bradshaw, and Petracca. It will also ease that pressure on Jones and Vince. 

Bring on 2017!

[george_on_the_outer 6,982]

1 hour ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

The simple way of looking at it is we have added 3 players I expect are walk up best 22. We have not lost any player who was walk up best 22. Our depth past spot 30 will lack maturity but will likely be better in quality if called on occasionally. Additionally the additions to the list bring a more balanced mix of positions in my view than what we had prior. 

Agree, and the addition of Hibberd, Melksham and Lewis extend our list of capable players to well beyond number 30. 

So when the inevitable injuries occur, for the first time in a long, long time we won't be struggling with NQR players to fill the gap.

[Dwight Schrute 16,797]

Of course we are, 

best 3 in's 

Lewis, Hibberd, Melksham

best 3 out's 

M.Jones, Grimes, Dawes

 

it's a clear upgrade though i wouldn't have minded keepign Matt Jones for another year personally.

 

 

 

[P-man 13,197]

38 minutes ago, Abe said:

Of course we are, 

best 3 in's 

Lewis, Hibberd, Melksham

best 3 out's 

M.Jones, Grimes, Dawes

 

it's a clear upgrade though i wouldn't have minded keepign Matt Jones for another year personally.

I'd say Dunn was our best out, backed up by the fact he's still playing AFL next year.

It's a clear improvement to the best 22 with introductions of Lewis and Hibberd, and ultimately this is what matters in terms of what is to be acheived in the coming two/three years. 

It's the next rung down where the scales tip slightly the other way if you're talking immediate improvement. The Casey side will feel an impact with some senior and reliable players at VFL level (Dunn, Grimes, Jones, Michie, Terlich, Newton) being replaced by project types or existing Casey players (Hannan, McKenna, DJ, Kielty, Smith). I think Dunn in particular is a loss that will be felt at Casey,

I guess it comes down to how important it is to have a strong VFL side. I think you'd rather have it strong than not, but how valuable is it if that strength is attained through middling players who can't cut it at senior level? 

I'd have retained Grimes for another year personally, and Michie I think was a little hard done, but the rest I think are understandable changes in terms of replacing NQRs with potential. Hannan and McKenna especially look to have a bit of x factor about them. Something you can't really say for any of the players who are going out.

Edited November 29, 2016 by P-man

[Dwight Schrute 16,797]

1 minute ago, P-man said:

 I'd say Dunn was our best out, backed up by the fact he's still playing AFL next year.

It's a clear improvement to the best 22 with introductions of Lewis and Hibberd, and ultimately this is what matters in terms of what is to be acheived in the coming two/three years. 

It's the next rung down where the scales tip slightly the other way if you're talking immediate improvement. The Casey side will feel an impact with some senior and reliable players at VFL level (Dunn, Grimes, Jones, Michie, Terlich, Newton) being replaced by project types or existing Casey players (Hannan, McKenna, DJ, Kielty, Smith). I think Dunn in particular is a loss that will be felt at Casey,

I guess it comes down to how important it is to have a strong VFL side. I think you'd rather have it strong than not, but how valuable is it if that strength is attained through players who can't cut it at senior level? 

I'd have retained Grimes for another year personally, and Michie I think was a little hard done, but the rest I think are understandable changes in terms of replacing NQRs with potential. Hannan and McKenna especially look to have a bit of x factor about them. Something you can't really say for any of the players who are going out.

I appreciate what you're saying P-man but the three players i listed in Jones, Dawes and Grimes are the three i view as being willingly moved on, where as Dunn requested a trade due to opportunity, so if we weren't going to play him in the seniors he was going to look at other clubs. 

i think Casey will take a hit, but i think they'll still be a fairly strong side with the natural progression of our younger players that will rotate through there this year, ANB should be better again this year and he might spend a bit of time there. 

I'd have also kept Grimes on for one more, he's an experienced player with an AFL body who would have been very handy if injuries hit hard at some stage.

[DeeSpencer 23,148]

1 hour ago, P-man said:

I'd say Dunn was our best out, backed up by the fact he's still playing AFL next year.

It's a clear improvement to the best 22 with introductions of Lewis and Hibberd, and ultimately this is what matters in terms of what is to be acheived in the coming two/three years. 

It's the next rung down where the scales tip slightly the other way if you're talking immediate improvement. The Casey side will feel an impact with some senior and reliable players at VFL level (Dunn, Grimes, Jones, Michie, Terlich, Newton) being replaced by project types or existing Casey players (Hannan, McKenna, DJ, Kielty, Smith). I think Dunn in particular is a loss that will be felt at Casey,

I guess it comes down to how important it is to have a strong VFL side. I think you'd rather have it strong than not, but how valuable is it if that strength is attained through middling players who can't cut it at senior level? 

I'd have retained Grimes for another year personally, and Michie I think was a little hard done, but the rest I think are understandable changes in terms of replacing NQRs with potential. Hannan and McKenna especially look to have a bit of x factor about them. Something you can't really say for any of the players who are going out.

I agree Dunn could be the most missed and was the best player moved on. The drop off from Dunn to Keilty is a far greater unknown and more important than the change in running players. Because if injuries strike to key defenders and Garland hasn't recovered form then Keilty has to play. If we have injuries to running players then our list of guys outside the best 22 is at least pretty long and varied. Bugg, Trengove, Kennedy, Wagner, White, Smith, Harmes, ANB, Vanders, JKH, Hannan, McKenna. 

I didn't rate Grimes so my bias is never going to see it that way, but for those who did want to keep him (or Matt Jones, Michie or otherwise) who's spot would you take out? I think we need the tall depth on the rookie list and McKenna and DJ are important developing players to have as well, we need that next wave of youth coming through.

The only spots I'd give up on the senior list are Lumumba's and Trengove's. And Lumumba had a contract and they chose to give Trengove another chance. Mitch White's senior games chances don't look all that great but he's very fit and can kick, he's a better half back option than Grimes and Michie.

[P-man 13,197]

57 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

I agree Dunn could be the most missed and was the best player moved on. The drop off from Dunn to Keilty is a far greater unknown and more important than the change in running players. Because if injuries strike to key defenders and Garland hasn't recovered form then Keilty has to play. If we have injuries to running players then our list of guys outside the best 22 is at least pretty long and varied. Bugg, Trengove, Kennedy, Wagner, White, Smith, Harmes, ANB, Vanders, JKH, Hannan, McKenna. 

I didn't rate Grimes so my bias is never going to see it that way, but for those who did want to keep him (or Matt Jones, Michie or otherwise) who's spot would you take out? I think we need the tall depth on the rookie list and McKenna and DJ are important developing players to have as well, we need that next wave of youth coming through.

The only spots I'd give up on the senior list are Lumumba's and Trengove's. And Lumumba had a contract and they chose to give Trengove another chance. Mitch White's senior games chances don't look all that great but he's very fit and can kick, he's a better half back option than Grimes and Michie.

I'd rather not put the mockers on any of the incoming players. I was in favour of giving Trenners another year so it wouldn't be him. I don't see White sticking around long tbh and I'm certainly not convinced he's a better halfback option than Grimes.

As I've said many times I thought Grimes was still capable of performing at the level. One good game and one poor game played in a role that was foreign to him wasn't enough to change my mind on that. But he's gone and we move on.

[The Chazz 4,077]

On 29 November 2016 at 8:19 AM, Jesus Hoganshaw said:

Every time I see this photo the bloke on the left reminds me of Jon Ralph.  Snake oil salesman written all over the above 2 blokes, as well as Ralph.

[jnrmac 18,980]

5 hours ago, P-man said:

I'd say Dunn was our best out, backed up by the fact he's still playing AFL next year.

But he couldn't get a game. So he was depth at best.

Three of the new guys (incl Melksham) are walk up starts to the best 22.

[P-man 13,197]

7 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

But he couldn't get a game. So he was depth at best.

Three of the new guys (incl Melksham) are walk up starts to the best 22.

Yep, I made that point myself. Looking at the top end when comparing the ins and outs, it's an obvious improvement.

Jury remains out on Melksham. He's certainly no walk up start to my best 22. The other two are no question.

[Yossarian 1,808]

32 minutes ago, billy2803 said:

Every time I see this photo the bloke on the left reminds me of Jon Ralph.  Snake oil salesman written all over the above 2 blokes, as well as Ralph.

Was a pretty obscure reference from me.

 

[mauriesy 6,805]

You'd have to wait a few years to see whether McKenna, Johnstone and Hannan are better than Grimes, Dunn and Jones, for example. Until then trying to score by points is pretty useless.

Comparing new talent that needs a few years to mature but could be good AFL players, against old talent that is a known quantity and likely to be on a downhill slide, is a nice bit of mathematical quantifying, but it's an illogical comparison.

 

[Ouch! 2,034]

Rather than go into a huge amount of detail I'll agree with those saying that our list is in a better spot, we have better depth, but perhaps more importantly I think we have finalised a few contracts that would have cost us a bit in player payments, and whilst Hibberd & Lewis would be on a decent coin, I would think that we would have a healthy enough buffer in our cap to make a play at a good free agent next year (along with a lot of clubs mind you!)

Only caveat here would be Lumumba and what happens with him and his settlement.

Equally as a comparison point, there are not a lot of players that I can say are 'lucky' to still be on our list anymore, or who should be 'playing for their future!' Last year there were probably 6-8 players, now I can't think of more than 2 (which I don't think is fair to name up in the pre-season or in Goodwin's first year as coach where all players get a chance to impress)

[Glenn Molloy 494]

21 hours ago, DeeZone said:

Have we improved our bottom six and added depth to our overall list, I believe that we have and significantly. Injuries aside we are already a better team than we were at Round 23. That's a great result. Go Dee's!!!!

Let's hope so, we got smashed by 111 points!!

[binman 38,281]

2 hours ago, Jesus Hoganshaw said:

Was a pretty obscure reference from me.

 

Funnily enough i was listening to a best of CD of theirs the other day in the car having grabbed it from my collection. I remarked to a friend that they sound remarkably fresh and undated.

Some of their stuff could be released now and no one would blink with their use of electronics, synths, samples and disparate influences - elements that are all currently widely used (its funny to hear so many 80s sounds in modern music, particularly the synth sounds and it being considered retro)

Edited November 30, 2016 by binman

[junk 342]

Hannan will be an asset in the foward line,we have better quality mids so there is no need to hang onto Newton.Grimes wasn't going to force anyone out of the senior side and given the fact no other team wanted him,McKenna being younger is a be a better option. Lets face not everyone on the senior list is going to get a regular game each week.Probably we will end up 8th or 9th on the ladder 2017

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

I'm not sure I agree with the whole 'is Grimes better than [insert name of new recruit]' argument as to whether our list has improved or not. 

Plainly our list has improved during this trade and draft period, but that is not the only driver as to why certain players have been moved on and new players brought in.

The reality is that AFL lists continually evolve - they are a continuum.

We have genuine midfield depth now. In fact, but for the ruck, we have genuine depth everywhere.

The likes of Grimes, Newton, Matt Jones, Dawes, Michie were obviously, in the view of the football department, not going to take our AFL side any further next year, nor did they have any further 'development' potential as they had been in the system for a long time and they are mature bodied players.

In short, they have been replaced with players whom the club sees as either:

- immediately improving our AFL side eg, Lewis, Melksham and Hibberd; or

- having 'development' potential/upside and who may improve our AFL side in the future eg, Hannan, Johnstone, McKenna.

The list seems very well balanced in terms of having a blend of older and younger players, experienced and not so experienced players.

In fact, I can't remember our list being so well structured before - and this trade and draft period only enhanced this.

 

Edited November 30, 2016 by Ron Burgundy