30 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

What if we traded Viney for Wines?

 

On raw stats - kicks, marks, disposals, Wines is an upgrade on Viney and has proven (until this year) to be more durable. However, Wines has worse disposal efficiency - going at 65% and turns the ball over more. 

Whats more is that Port would be thinking Wines is way more valuable. Former no. 7 pick, co-captain of the club as a straight swap for a downgrade. Sure you could swap picks to even that up. But as I’ve said earlier we shouldnt be selling the farm and taking up our focus for another or replacement slow inside mid with poor disposals

3 minutes ago, AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey said:

On raw stats - kicks, marks, disposals, Wines is an upgrade on Viney and has proven (until this year) to be more durable. However, Wines has worse disposal efficiency - going at 65% and turns the ball over more. 

Whats more is that Port would be thinking Wines is way more valuable. Former no. 7 pick, co-captain of the club as a straight swap for a downgrade. Sure you could swap picks to even that up. But as I’ve said earlier we shouldnt be selling the farm and taking up our focus for another or replacement slow inside mid with poor disposals

Disposal efficiency is a useless stat IMO. The factors they use to determine it aren't great and as a stat it lacks a lot of context. Watching games I wouldn't have rated Viney's disposal better then Wines.

Viney is rated as the worst kick inside 50 in the whole comp this year, a huge area of weakness for us. I'm not sure where Wines ranks in that stat, but clearly he wouldn't be worse than Viney so wouldn't be an improvement in that area.

I wouldn't sell the farm for Wines either, and wouldn't want to sweeten the deal much if it was Viney for Wines, just thought it was an interesting hypothetical.

1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

Disposal efficiency is a useless stat IMO. The factors they use to determine it aren't great and as a stat it lacks a lot of context. Watching games I wouldn't have rated Viney's disposal better then Wines.

Viney is rated as the worst kick inside 50 in the whole comp this year, a huge area of weakness for us. I'm not sure where Wines ranks in that stat, but clearly he wouldn't be worse than Viney so wouldn't be an improvement in that area.

I wouldn't sell the farm for Wines either, and wouldn't want to sweeten the deal much if it was Viney for Wines, just thought it was an interesting hypothetical.

Never said Viney is a great kick either, and completely agree that disposal efficiency isnt the be and end all of stats, just wanted to show theyre just as bad as each other in an area which has been our weakness all year. Wines for me falls into that can hit a 25m target or just blazes clearing balls into turnovers kind of player with little else except immense in-and-under extraction skills - of which we have an abundance of.

Its an interesting hypothetical to be sure, but one that doesnt make much sense given our position IMO

Pass, can't kick, more of the same of what we have.

Watch the finals the teams that will progress are the ones that control the ball, it isn't all about winning the Football at the contest anymore it is more important to keep it once you have control.  We cant do that so we need players that can, Wines isn't one of these players

2 hours ago, AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey said:

Never said Viney is a great kick either, and completely agree that disposal efficiency isnt the be and end all of stats, just wanted to show theyre just as bad as each other in an area which has been our weakness all year. Wines for me falls into that can hit a 25m target or just blazes clearing balls into turnovers kind of player with little else except immense in-and-under extraction skills - of which we have an abundance of.

Its an interesting hypothetical to be sure, but one that doesnt make much sense given our position IMO

Yeah, that's why I suggested Viney for Wines. Like for like. Agree that last thing we need is another in and under type for sure.

Just think it changes some things up for us from a leadership perspective and a dynamic as a group.

2 hours ago, drdrake said:

Pass, can't kick, more of the same of what we have.

Watch the finals the teams that will progress are the ones that control the ball, it isn't all about winning the Football at the contest anymore it is more important to keep it once you have control.  We cant do that so we need players that can, Wines isn't one of these players

Agree. Inside mid with poor kicking skills, we have those type of players. 

4 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Disposal efficiency is a useless stat IMO. The factors they use to determine it aren't great and as a stat it lacks a lot of context. Watching games I wouldn't have rated Viney's disposal better then Wines.

Viney is rated as the worst kick inside 50 in the whole comp this year, a huge area of weakness for us. I'm not sure where Wines ranks in that stat, but clearly he wouldn't be worse than Viney so wouldn't be an improvement in that area.

I wouldn't sell the farm for Wines either, and wouldn't want to sweeten the deal much if it was Viney for Wines, just thought it was an interesting hypothetical.

Maybe watch the WCE v ESS game again from last night LN? You will clearly see how disposal efficiency won that game.....Check out Lewis Jetta's game/stats: 85% efficiency, 19 disposals, 400 m gained,  4 score involvements & in the best 5 on the ground.

IMO it is the most important stat in our game. Simon Goodwin thinks so as well & I remember him saying after the Collingwood game that 'our disposal efficiency & accountability is killing us'.......(he might be delusional though)

I'm with you LN.....Wines, no thanks! These are the sorts of players we have too many of.

10 hours ago, John Demonic said:

 

If	Ollie Wines is indeed gettable ...
then	the Dees should take a close look.

Absolutely.  Guns like Wines should always be a target.  Don’t make the same mistake twice 

Oliver Viney Wines Petracca Harmes inside 

Brayshaw Langdon Salem outside 

6 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

What if we traded Viney for Wines?

 

That was my thinking...

Wtf.

Wines and Port 3rd round 2019

for

MFC 2020 1st round and Neal-Bullen. 

Goodwin probably already offering up 2 first rounders

8 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Spot on, ADCAG.  Supporters at the moment want change, and rightly so, but it means we want the club to be keen on anyone and everyone.  That won't happen - we will be lucky to get 2 - 3 players through trades/free agency who will slot in as best 22 players.  We can't put time into every single player who might be looking at new opportunities.

2-3 players can include Wines (and we can include our first round draft pick next year for outside speed). If we're getting Langdon. If we're in the hunt for Tomlinson and acquire him: Then who else? Of course, much remains to be seen about who we're chasing come trade week. However ponder this: If Brayshaw has a poor year next year, and Wines stays and has a big year. which potential trade do you think we will have rued not pursuing? Of course Wines is not an immediate need, but there's such a thing as jumping on an opportunity that arises too.

Edited September 6, 20195 yr by John Demonic

12 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

2-3 players can include Wines (and we can include our first round draft pick next year for outside speed). If we're getting Langdon. If we're in the hunt for Tomlinson and acquire him: Then who else? Of course, much remains to be seen about who we're chasing come trade week. However ponder this: If Brayshaw has a poor year next year, and Wines stays and has a big year. which potential trade do you think we will have rued not pursuing? Of course Wines is not an immediate need, but there's such a thing as jumping on an opportunity that arises too.

Agree

18 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

2-3 players can include Wines (and we can include our first round draft pick next year for outside speed). If we're getting Langdon. If we're in the hunt for Tomlinson and acquire him: Then who else? Of course, much remains to be seen about who we're chasing come trade week. However ponder this: If Brayshaw has a poor year next year, and Wines stays and has a big year. which potential trade do you think we will have rued not pursuing? Of course Wines is not an immediate need, but there's such a thing as jumping on an opportunity that arises too.

Why do we need Wines?

Serious question there.  What does he add to our side that we don't already have?

5 hours ago, Laughing Goat said:

Maybe watch the WCE v ESS game again from last night LN? You will clearly see how disposal efficiency won that game.....Check out Lewis Jetta's game/stats: 85% efficiency, 19 disposals, 400 m gained,  4 score involvements & in the best 5 on the ground.

IMO it is the most important stat in our game. Simon Goodwin thinks so as well & I remember him saying after the Collingwood game that 'our disposal efficiency & accountability is killing us'.......(he might be delusional though)

I'm with you LN.....Wines, no thanks! These are the sorts of players we have too many of.

You can technically have a turnover and have it counted as an "effective disposal". It's a useless stat.

 

8 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Why do we need Wines?

Serious question there.  What does he add to our side that we don't already have?

What we don't currently have is Brayshaw's 2018 form and there seems to be an assumption that he will return to it next year. I'm sceptical and see Wines as an immediate upgrade, both in terms of his centre clearance work and his ability to deliver it into the forward line more often, or an ability to play up rotating at half forward with Tracc in middle.

Who has the higher ceiling is debatable, but they're similar players at the same age, although Wines would add more experience and more leadership qualities. If he became available, why not jump on the opportunity and trade one for the other and freshen up the midfield dynamic we currently have and not go into next year assuming everything will click back into gear if we add Langdon and pick 3. As I said above, it's a horizontal trade move, so it's not absolutely necessary. We don't need Wines, but there could be benefits if it's trading away the potential for another poor Brayshaw year.

Edited September 6, 20195 yr by John Demonic

17 hours ago, drdrake said:

Pass, can't kick, more of the same of what we have.

Watch the finals the teams that will progress are the ones that control the ball, it isn't all about winning the Football at the contest anymore it is more important to keep it once you have control.  We cant do that so we need players that can, Wines isn't one of these players

The game evolves and teams follow other successful teams. Hawthorn in their prime were skilful and had elite skills all around the ground (until they got Frawley). Keeping possession is a passing phase.

We will bounce back next year and our brand of football will be hard at the contest with a defence that intercepts everything and then repels. Other teams will copy us.

3 hours ago, John Demonic said:

What we don't currently have is Brayshaw's 2018 form and there seems to be an assumption that he will return to it next year. I'm sceptical and see Wines as an immediate upgrade, both in terms of his centre clearance work and his ability to deliver it into the forward line more often, or an ability to play up rotating at half forward with Tracc in middle.
 

how many of our players had 2018 form this year. Max and ??  so your assumption could apply to 30+ other players, not sure why Brayshaw has been singled out. We know he has the capability to play better and obviously having his team mates around him playing better would help raise his game. Ollies form this year has not been outstanding, but i guess the assumption is that his form will return next year.

13 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

You can technically have a turnover and have it counted as an "effective disposal". It's a useless stat.

 

Yeah can't work that out but obviously not an important stat for Goodwin either as we have the biggest turnovers in the AFL......

5 minutes ago, Laughing Goat said:

Yeah can't work that out but obviously not an important stat for Goodwin either as we have the biggest turnovers in the AFL......

Haha true mate.

I haven't looked up his stats and correct me if I'm wrong but from what I've seen of Ollie he is an excellent mark of the footy? I've been thinking this is an area we need to improve and Ollie would be strong in the contest on the ground and in the air. I'd dare say he'd become the top contested mark in our midfield group Max aside. I think he would benefit our side due to this and would happily see him added to our list.

On 9/6/2019 at 1:08 PM, drdrake said:

Pass, can't kick, more of the same of what we have.

Watch the finals the teams that will progress are the ones that control the ball, it isn't all about winning the Football at the contest anymore it is more important to keep it once you have control.  We cant do that so we need players that can, Wines isn't one of these players

Wow!

What an extraordinary turnaround!

Weren't you bagging out Watts about 'not getting his head over the footy' now you say it's not about the contest anymore and about holding onto the footy (with kicking skills, no doubt?)

You have no idea

23 hours ago, jumbo returns said:

Wow!

What an extraordinary turnaround!

Weren't you bagging out Watts about 'not getting his head over the footy' now you say it's not about the contest anymore and about holding onto the footy (with kicking skills, no doubt?)

You have no idea

Read the post again, I posted it isn't all about the contest anymore, meaning you need to be able to win the ball but more importantly keep the ball, suggest you have no idea our turnovers is the reason we finished 17th.  Adding Wines just adds another player that is extremely limited by foot.

Edited September 15, 20195 yr by drdrake

On 9/6/2019 at 7:33 PM, spirit of norm smith said:

Wtf.

Wines and Port 3rd round 2020

for

MFC 2020 1st round and Neal-Bullen. 

Anyone onboard? Slightly amended.  Speculative!!!

7 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Anyone onboard? Slightly amended.  Speculative!!!

ANB would be worth absolutely nothing to them, and you're also asking for them to give us a third rounder to go with trading their co-captain.

Fanciful thinking.