Zak Jones

[old55 23,573]

3 hours ago, DominatrixTyson said:

When will he be? This season is showing that recruiting for a premiership in the next two years is what many teams should be doing including us, with one eye on the long term with responsible balance between using their draft picks for young players or trading them for established players. Zak Jones is a player that is ready to make an impact and be a solid contributor in 2018-2019. Stretch is currently in the VFL with no guarantee that he will become better than Zak Jones after 3 or 4 years.

Same line of thinking goes into why we're wanting to recruit another forward or ruck/forward and not put all our eggs in the basket of hoping Weideman is a great player long term when the next 2 years are important in filling our holes because there is no guarantee that he will come on and if he doesn't, the team falls behind others long term and in the short term you're stuck with VFL level players rotating in and out of the side.

By the end of next season.  Stretch is 18 months younger than Jones.

[Fat Tony 5,229]

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

By the end of next season.  Stretch is 18 months younger than Jones.

Stretch does not have the explosive pace or toughness that Zak Jones has. While Stretch has better decision making and kicking than Jones, I feel he is actually slow for an outside midfielder (and about average pace versus the entire AFL pool.)

I hope Stretch becomes a better player than Jones and think he will have a decent AFL career. But Jones, at 22, is already ranked 67th in the total competition for Supercoach ranking points and 101st for average Supercoach ranking points. He is also 8th in the competition for average running bounces, equal with Jayden Hunt.

[old55 23,573]

1 hour ago, Fat Tony said:

Stretch does not have the explosive pace or toughness that Zak Jones has. While Stretch has better decision making and kicking than Jones, I feel he is actually slow for an outside midfielder (and about average pace versus the entire AFL pool.)

I hope Stretch becomes a better player than Jones and think he will have a decent AFL career. But Jones, at 22, is already ranked 67th in the total competition for Supercoach ranking points and 101st for average Supercoach ranking points. He is also 8th in the competition for average running bounces, equal with Jayden Hunt.

I think we need more "Salem" i.e. Stretch ahead of more "Hunt" i.e. Z.Jones

[Fat Tony 5,229]

11 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

I think we need more "Salem" i.e. Stretch ahead of more "Hunt" i.e. Z.Jones

Obviously it would be great to add a player with both pace and skill, but personally I think we need leg speed in the midfield more to compliment Lewis, Tyson, Jones, Viney, Oliver, Salem etc.

The other point I would make on Zak Jones is that he is behind only Oliver, Nathan Jones, Hibberd, Pederson, Viney, Lewis and Harmes in terms of average ranking points per game at Melbourne and behind only Oliver, Nathan Jones and Viney in total ranking points. He would be a great get IMO given the cost and his age.

[poita 3,902]

I'd be more than happy to have Zak on board, but the trade price is key.

Hawthorn got Tom Mitchell for pick 14 and a swap of late picks. Jones is not worth that, but I'd certainly grab him for our 2nd round pick, which is currently sitting at 28. That's about what we gave up for Melksham, and I rate Zak higher than Jake.

Sydney might be forced to deal at that level, unless North or another team jumps in with an earlier 2nd round pick.

PS Supercoach points are not a reason to trade or not trade for players.

[Fat Tony 5,229]

3 minutes ago, poita said:

I'd be more than happy to have Zak on board, but the trade price is key.

Hawthorn got Tom Mitchell for pick 14 and a swap of late picks. Jones is not worth that, but I'd certainly grab him for our 2nd round pick, which is currently sitting at 28. That's about what we gave up for Melksham, and I rate Zak higher than Jake.

Sydney might be forced to deal at that level, unless North or another team jumps in with an earlier 2nd round pick.

PS Supercoach points are not a reason to trade or not trade for players.

He will definitely cost a first round pick.

PS Supercoach points are not perfect but they are probably the best single data point indicator of output IMO.

[old55 23,573]

1 hour ago, Fat Tony said:

Obviously it would be great to add a player with both pace and skill, but personally I think we need leg speed in the midfield more to compliment Lewis, Tyson, Jones, Viney, Oliver, Salem etc.

The other point I would make on Zak Jones is that he is behind only Oliver, Nathan Jones, Hibberd, Pederson, Viney, Lewis and Harmes in terms of average ranking points per game at Melbourne and behind only Oliver, Nathan Jones and Viney in total ranking points. He would be a great get IMO given the cost and his age.

I'd prefer Zak Jones to May, price considered.

[Lord Travis 10,730]

Jones would cost a first round pick. He was drafted first round at pick 15. 3 years on he is proving he is AFL quality and will likely finish top 5 in Sydney's bnf. It'd cost a first rounder to get him. He's worth that, but we have other pressing needs first IMO.

Edited May 30, 2017 by Lord Travis

[Vogon Poetry 2,095]

I don't know opposition lists well enough but rather than back the truck up for a gun recruit I'd be looking for a trade in the Hibberd mould - value for money.  If we can replace a marginal bottom 6 player with someone who is significantly better but not a gun we get a lot of improvement whilst maintaining early picks and salary cap. 

I don't believe we need to win the battle for gun players out of contract.  We need sensible trading and then target a free agent.  We have enough players with significant elite potential to not play a desperate hand for out of contract players.  Good free agents will come if we are good enough. 

[praha 11,240]

19 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

I don't know opposition lists well enough but rather than back the truck up for a gun recruit I'd be looking for a trade in the Hibberd mould - value for money.  If we can replace a marginal bottom 6 player with someone who is significantly better but not a gun we get a lot of improvement whilst maintaining early picks and salary cap. 

I don't believe we need to win the battle for gun players out of contract.  We need sensible trading and then target a free agent.  We have enough players with significant elite potential to not play a desperate hand for out of contract players.  Good free agents will come if we are good enough. 

Very much this.

I hope we are never factored into these "*club* is throwing millions at *player*" news reports.

Essendon is throwing a million at Dusty because they're desperate. I don't believe for a second that they're finals-worthy or have the depth that their fans seem to think they have. They're going to start feeling the pinch of last year for a number of years yet. They need to recruit and draft very aggressively. Their current list can't cut it.

North seems to be putting all of its eggs in one basket. It knows it can't afford to crash and draft slowly so it's going for the big guns.

Richmond will be regretting having thrown so much at Prestia and Caddy. They will lose Dusty. No chance he stays if they can't get to at least within 80% of the best offer.

[Adam The God 30,252]

9 hours ago, Vogon Poetry said:

I don't know opposition lists well enough but rather than back the truck up for a gun recruit I'd be looking for a trade in the Hibberd mould - value for money.  If we can replace a marginal bottom 6 player with someone who is significantly better but not a gun we get a lot of improvement whilst maintaining early picks and salary cap. 

I don't believe we need to win the battle for gun players out of contract.  We need sensible trading and then target a free agent.  We have enough players with significant elite potential to not play a desperate hand for out of contract players.  Good free agents will come if we are good enough. 

Hibberd would have to be one of our greatest trades in the modern era. I know that sounds a little silly, but I can't recall a player that has come in and performed from game 1 at such a high level, consistently.

A player in the Hibberd mould would be great, but if he'd played since Round 1, he'd be in AA contention. No doubt about it. So he's playing A grade football at the moment IMO.

The circumstances that Hibberd was drawn to Melbourne were also slightly unusual in that Goodwin and his best mate Melksham were already at the club. I don't think we can expect or hope that players like him (and Lewis - a similar story with Todd Viney) fall into our laps again. But, perhaps the wheel will start to turn and good players will look at Melbourne with a desire to play for a club with a young talented list on the rise. Playing finals is obviously a huge part of creating an environment good players will want to come to.

9 hours ago, praha said:

Very much this.

I hope we are never factored into these "*club* is throwing millions at *player*" news reports.

Essendon is throwing a million at Dusty because they're desperate. I don't believe for a second that they're finals-worthy or have the depth that their fans seem to think they have. They're going to start feeling the pinch of last year for a number of years yet. They need to recruit and draft very aggressively. Their current list can't cut it.

North seems to be putting all of its eggs in one basket. It knows it can't afford to crash and draft slowly so it's going for the big guns.

Richmond will be regretting having thrown so much at Prestia and Caddy. They will lose Dusty. No chance he stays if they can't get to at least within 80% of the best offer.

I disagree with this. My uninformed view is that Dusty will want to stay at Richmond and it'll take an absolutely insane offer to drag him away from Punt Rd. And even then, he might simply settle for a pay increase at Tigerland.

[Lucifers Hero 39,788]

7 hours ago, A F said:

My uninformed view is that Dusty will want to stay at Richmond and it'll take an absolutely insane offer to drag him away from Punt Rd. And even then, he might simply settle for a pay increase at Tigerland.

I also think Dusty will stay.  Shopping him around is a ploy by his manager (Carr??) to flush out the best offer for leverage with Richmond.

He did this with Dusty's last contract except Richmond didn't take the bait and declared they would let him go.  The ploy backfired and the Dusty camp was left with egg on face.

Carr now has Richmond over a barrel and they will pay dearly for 'embarrassing' the Dusty camp last time...altho' it was of Carr's own doing.  This time Carr will laugh all the way to the bank...

[Vogon Poetry 2,095]

9 hours ago, A F said:

Hibberd would have to be one of our greatest trades in the modern era. I know that sounds a little silly, but I can't recall a player that has come in and performed from game 1 at such a high level, consistently.

A player in the Hibberd mould would be great, but if he'd played since Round 1, he'd be in AA contention. No doubt about it. So he's playing A grade football at the moment IMO.

The circumstances that Hibberd was drawn to Melbourne were also slightly unusual in that Goodwin and his best mate Melksham were already at the club. I don't think we can expect or hope that players like him (and Lewis - a similar story with Todd Viney) fall into our laps again. But, perhaps the wheel will start to turn and good players will look at Melbourne with a desire to play for a club with a young talented list on the rise. Playing finals is obviously a huge part of creating an environment good players will want to come to.

You seemed to have missed my point AF and yes I agree with your comments on Hibberd.  But prior to taking the field not many here thought he'd be anywhere near as good as he is.

My point is you can still trade well and get good players without paying top dollar.  Williams, Marchbank, Hill and T Mitchell are examples of what I'm talking about.  I'd be looking at Dogs and GWS to see what we could shake out.  They have very deep lists and we could perhaps offer opportunities to players they can't. 

[beelzebub 23,373]

37 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

You seemed to have missed my point AF and yes I agree with your comments on Hibberd.  But prior to taking the field not many here thought he'd be anywhere near as good as he is.

 

in all fairness to anyone.....neither did he !!

[Biffen 12,943]

Off loading Lewis,Vince and Garlett were 3 dumb moves that benefitted us.

Bigtime.

Hibberd was a good get,as was Hannan.

Not sold on milkshake yet.

Mitch Clark and H were interesting .

We still need a CHF.

[Gator 17,350]

1 hour ago, Vogon Poetry said:

You seemed to have missed my point AF and yes I agree with your comments on Hibberd.  But prior to taking the field not many here thought he'd be anywhere near as good as he is.

My point is you can still trade well and get good players without paying top dollar.  Williams, Marchbank, Hill and T Mitchell are examples of what I'm talking about.  I'd be looking at Dogs and GWS to see what we could shake out.  They have very deep lists and we could perhaps offer opportunities to players they can't. 

Other than @mo64, and perhaps a couple others, I think most who had seen him play thought he'd be the gun that he is.

I agree with the rest of your sentiments though.

I'd like a classy outside mid and another rock-like key defender, where you don't have your heart in your mouth every time they touch it, but I don't think you need to sell the farm to get them.

[Forest Demon 4,681]

22 hours ago, poita said:

I'd be more than happy to have Zak on board, but the trade price is key.

Hawthorn got Tom Mitchell for pick 14 and a swap of late picks. Jones is not worth that, but I'd certainly grab him for our 2nd round pick, which is currently sitting at 28. That's about what we gave up for Melksham, and I rate Zak higher than Jake.

Sydney might be forced to deal at that level, unless North or another team jumps in with an earlier 2nd round pick.

PS Supercoach points are not a reason to trade or not trade for players.

Pick 14 for Mitchell is an absolute steal though. Luckily they paid overs for a crocked O'Meara to somewhat balance it out.

[Members' Wing 1,106]

9 minutes ago, Forest Demon said:

Pick 14 for Mitchell is an absolute steal though. Luckily they paid overs for a crocked O'Meara to somewhat balance it out.

I'd say pick 14 for Mitchell was about right.

[Wunders 397]

21 minutes ago, Forest Demon said:

Pick 14 for Mitchell is an absolute steal though. Luckily they paid overs for a crocked O'Meara to somewhat balance it out.

At the time and with what he has done disposal wise this year it is for one of the best inside mids in the game (e.g. this season if you go by disposals - 354 to date and next highest is 327).

11 minutes ago, Members' Wing said:

I'd say pick 14 for Mitchell was about right.

Compare Mitchell to the price of Prestia and it's a steal haha. I'd happily take him for pick 14 every day of the week knowing how the draft can toss up duds as much as good players. But if an inside mid isn't what you need then obviously that changes what you are willing to pay.

 

On Jones, if they give pick 14 for mitchell im not paying below pick 20 for Jones (it's [censored] if they ask for our first round pick, when they accept 14 for Mitchell).

[Bring Back Barassi 552]

Upsets me to see Zak Jones rip it up for the Swans when is rightful home is with his brother, at the Dees.

 

Contract now up for renewal, can we get him ?

[Freddy Fuschia 741]

On 31/05/2017 at 11:24 AM, Biffen said:

Off loading Lewis,Vince and Garlett were 3 dumb moves that benefitted us.

Bigtime.

Hibberd was a good get,as was Hannan.

Not sold on milkshake yet.

Mitch Clark and H were interesting .

We still need a CHF.

We have a CHF. His name is Jesse Hogan.

[Demons11 7,013]

On 31/05/2017 at 0:12 PM, Wunders said:

At the time and with what he has done disposal wise this year it is for one of the best inside mids in the game (e.g. this season if you go by disposals - 354 to date and next highest is 327).

Compare Mitchell to the price of Prestia and it's a steal haha. I'd happily take him for pick 14 every day of the week knowing how the draft can toss up duds as much as good players. But if an inside mid isn't what you need then obviously that changes what you are willing to pay.

 

On Jones, if they give pick 14 for mitchell im not paying below pick 20 for Jones (it's [censored] if they ask for our first round pick, when they accept 14 for Mitchell).

Jones was pick 14 a few years and is 3 years younger than Mitchell.  You must definitely would need a top 15 pick to get him 

[KingDingAling 3,758]

8 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

Jones was pick 14 a few years and is 3 years younger than Mitchell.  You must definitely would need a top 15 pick to get him 

Yeah, probably need this years first rounder to get him. About the right price, and if I were Sydney's list manager I would stronger consider it. They are going to hard up squeezing Reid in that cap, and if they do they are going to need to free up some $$$. Sydney are in a tricky position now. They have a lot of older types accustomed to top dollar, and they have quality young talent entering their first big contract. I rate Jones, but if they don't lose Jones - it will be someone else equally as good.

[deelete my account 1,194]

22 minutes ago, KingDingAling said:

Yeah, probably need this years first rounder to get him. About the right price, and if I were Sydney's list manager I would stronger consider it. They are going to hard up squeezing Reid in that cap, and if they do they are going to need to free up some $$$. Sydney are in a tricky position now. They have a lot of older types accustomed to top dollar, and they have quality young talent entering their first big contract. I rate Jones, but if they don't lose Jones - it will be someone else equally as good.

I have to wonder, if they're trying to off-load Tippett or Reid to keep Zak Jones, then we'd be best not taking the bait (if facebook tippett rumour is true) and instead making a push for Jones and considering Pedo as our full time CHF/ruck chop out for next year and re-assessing the ruck/fwd need in 2018. That gives Sydney not enough time to find a buyer for K-Tip/Reid, and then we can sew the idea more into Jones' head of a move south.

When opportunity knocks sums up the Zak Jones idea. So we give up a first round? Wouldn't we trade Dom Tyson (1st Rnd) for Zak Jones right now? I would.

Edited June 5, 2017 by DominatrixTyson

[Wolfmother 182]

Wouldn't mind having a crack at Jack.., he has been injured this season and he would be perfect at 29 to replace a Vince. 

 

Only if he came to us in a Lewis type deal 

 

leadership but not expected to be our best player and I think he would suit our team