43 minutes ago, Tram 74 said:

After he was told how good Oliver was. He  did all that was expected of him but you can be made to look a little foolish if your talent identification people are no good.

Yeah like I said in the first place 

why weren't we keen on wingard? 

Cool, calm, direct.  BS free zone.

A first class operator.

Ordinary player, gun administrator.

hes a good 'gets the job done' bloke. we see people squabbling here about payed too much or didnt ask enough constantly on here and elsewhere. I say [censored] that. he gets the blokes into the club and gets our blokes to their destination of choice - unless we are dealing with [censored] (see current Freo regime...) a couple of numbers next the picks are largely irrelevant. get the right ballpark and let's make it happen. no fart arseing around not being happy with pick 7 when we after 5.

I like the methodology and importantly with that so do most people - hence we now have good trading terms with most clubs and aren't seen as d8ckheads who want the earth for their current players but are only wanting to pay for passion pop while ordering French champagne for others! 

I think he's a better administrator than a coach. 

I like the way he conducts himself.  While I still think we gave too much for lever, in general he (and the rest of the recruiting folks) has followed the model of several top clubs in not dicking around and just getting the deals done.  This wins us a lot of respect from other clubs and makes them more willing to work with us. 

Overall, I think he's doing pretty well, but of course we won't know the whole story for years yet. 

9 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

I've been a critic of some of the trades. In the past I think he's been a bit too keen to be liked by the media and to get deals done early often with the justification of having time to do other deals - when at least from the outside there hasn't been other deals for us to do. But my concern hasn't been the direction of the deals simply the value of the little wins along the way.

....

My trading concerns are mainly based around the idea that we had leverage in certain deals where we had players signed on and the opposition had incentive to deal with us. The Lever deal, the Salem/Tyson deal, the Melksham deal even the Frost deal. All moments where I think we gave up a lot and probably could've just got a little bit here or there back.

...

Maybe at the end of the day it doesn't matter and certainly the good of bringing in the right players to improve the team outweighs my concerns. 

...

I am boghled by your first comment.  Do you really think that Josh has bent over in trades to try and get the media to like him?

That's crazy.  He got trades done because he knew what he wanted,  knew how he valued it and didn't argue over steak knives for the sake of it. 

All the trades you mentioned were obviously targeted players. Theft might not have worked out based on the players performance (sadly even though Tyson gave us agreat 3 years when we needed it, he has now been pushed out. And given it was Billings vs Salem/Tyson I'd say we won it anyway).  We might not have "won" them by paying unders but we paid a pretty reasonable price, and got it done. 

Negotiatiors who get win win are good negotiatiors. You get your target, all parties are happy, and you'll do business again. Idon't understand why so meant people rate negotiators based on being able to rip off the opposition.

10 hours ago, Nasher said:

I think he blinks too much.

Haha his major downfall, loses to often in the don’t blink first game. He should stick to rock, paper, scissors.

?

Edited October 12, 20186 yr by Cards13

Class operator. The reason he was the soul survivor from 2013...

Lets rate Josh MaHoney... after he gets Sam Weideman's contract extension... and not before this time.

 

.

Peter Jackson is a wrap for him that’s good enough for me.

Folk think that Josh Mahoney has final say on trade deals. Bless.

Its a committee decision. 

I think Taylor makes him look pretty good. Of the big-time off field footy department guys, I have Taylor miles ahead. Mahoney's ok though. No howlers yet, but no massive wins either.

He’s been a super important component in the re-branding of this club.

We appear to be a professional, disciplined and respectable organisation now.

Freo on the other hand ... 

 

22 minutes ago, Dappa Dan said:

I think Taylor makes him look pretty good. Of the big-time off field footy department guys, I have Taylor miles ahead. Mahoney's ok though. No howlers yet, but no massive wins either.

If trading up to enable Taylor to select Oliver and Weed isn't a massive win then we've got a lot to look forward to.

Edited October 14, 20186 yr by Fifty-5

1 minute ago, Fifty-5 said:

If trading up to enable Taylor to select Oliver and Weed isn't a massive win then we've got a lot to look forward to.

Of course it's not a massive win. We traded plenty away to move up. With our subsequent results the season after that trade the ending value of the pics was about even. The recruitment of Oliver wasn't on Mahoney.

Previous few off-seasons have been good. Trading up and landing guys like Hibberd, Melksham and Lever is perfect recruiting. This off-season he's talked the talk so far, but we're yet to see any real results. Resigning Vanders was a success. Tyson for Pruess was a neutral trade with no real winners or losers foreseeable yet. It will all come down to the Hogan/May/Kola deals as to whether we can rate this period a success like the past few.

7 minutes ago, Dappa Dan said:

Of course it's not a massive win. We traded plenty away to move up. With our subsequent results the season after that trade the ending value of the pics was about even. The recruitment of Oliver wasn't on Mahoney.

Mahoney, Taylor and no doubt Viney collaborated to engineer a major recruiting coup.

Edited October 14, 20186 yr by Fifty-5

Failed coach who was only moved into admin so they didn’t have to pay out his contract. 

Received a lot of credit in the media for others work (a little like a senior coach) but is only 50/50.

 

The GM football manager in an AFL clubs having a huge difference in responsibilities and reports. I don’t think Mahoney has huge responsibilities in term of the AFL landscape. 

 

He in the seat when we have had a successful rebuild but wouldn’t give him huge responsibility for it. 

Roos and Viney did a lot of the work especially in Roos third year when Goodwin was the coach without the media pressure. 

3 hours ago, Dappa Dan said:

Of course it's not a massive win. We traded plenty away to move up. With our subsequent results the season after that trade the ending value of the pics was about even. The recruitment of Oliver wasn't on Mahoney.

Tell us what he traded away to move up in that draft, I want to see if you know.

12 minutes ago, Wolfgang219 said:

Failed coach who was only moved into admin so they didn’t have to pay out his contract. 

Received a lot of credit in the media for others work (a little like a senior coach) but is only 50/50.

 

The GM football manager in an AFL clubs having a huge difference in responsibilities and reports. I don’t think Mahoney has huge responsibilities in term of the AFL landscape. 

 

He in the seat when we have had a successful rebuild but wouldn’t give him huge responsibility for it. 

Roos and Viney did a lot of the work especially in Roos third year when Goodwin was the coach without the media pressure. 

I'm sure you wouldn't know.

25 minutes ago, Wolfgang219 said:

Failed coach who was only moved into admin so they didn’t have to pay out his contract. 

Received a lot of credit in the media for others work (a little like a senior coach) but is only 50/50.

 

The GM football manager in an AFL clubs having a huge difference in responsibilities and reports. I don’t think Mahoney has huge responsibilities in term of the AFL landscape. 

 

He in the seat when we have had a successful rebuild but wouldn’t give him huge responsibility for it. 

Roos and Viney did a lot of the work especially in Roos third year when Goodwin was the coach without the media pressure. 

well you are entitled to think what you like

but peter jackson very obviously disagrees being prepared to support him for ceo. so i'll back his judgement

15 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

Tell us what he traded away to move up in that draft, I want to see if you know.

Sorry I know it wasn’t directed at me but I couldn’t remember the trading they did in 2015 draft to get Oliver so l looked it up. 

Melbourne gave up

Pick 6

Pick 29 and

Our 2016 first round pick which ended up being pick 9

Gold Coast gave us

Pick 3 (that ended up being 4)

Pick 10 and 

Pick 43

So that all looks pretty fair pick wise to both clubs but we ended up with Oliver so it is a monster, monster, monster win to us. 

2 minutes ago, FarNorthernD said:

Sorry I know it wasn’t directed at me but I couldn’t remember the trading they did in 2015 draft to get Oliver so l looked it up. 

Melbourne gave up

Pick 6

Pick 29 and

Our 2016 first round pick which ended up being pick 9

Gold Coast gave us

Pick 3 (that ended up being 4)

Pick 10 and 

Pick 43

So that all looks pretty fair pick wise to both clubs but we ended up with Oliver so it is a monster, monster, monster win to us. 

Yeah I know that, I was more interested in Dappa Dan's response seeing he said we traded away plenty to trade up.

7 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Mahoney, Taylor and no doubt Viney collaborated to engineer a major recruiting coup.

What the hell are you talking about... A "coup"?... Oliver was a bolter. We're not talking about trading 3 first rounders for RG3 here...

4 hours ago, drysdale demon said:

Tell us what he traded away to move up in that draft, I want to see if you know.

 

4 hours ago, drysdale demon said:

Yeah I know that, I was more interested in Dappa Dan's response seeing he said we traded away plenty to trade up.

Again... What are you talking about? You've come to an MFC forum and you're sceptical about the knowledge of other posters?

We had pick 10, and flipped it (with some overs) for Bugg and a slightly earlier first... then traded that first and our following season's first (end result = 2015 - 8 and 2016 - 9) for the chance to pick at what ended up being 4 and 9 in 2015... 8+9 vs 4+9.... There's not a huge disparity there... There was some shuffling of later picks as well of course, as there usually is, but the white meat of that deal was the above pick inside the top 10.

The recruiters went for Oliver very late in the piece. It wasn't some incredible long-planned pick up "Darling" style.

I wanna see Mahoney pull a Howie Roseman before I get super excited. We're lucky we have Taylor who picks up gems late in the draft seemingly all the time. We haven't owned a trade week yet. We've done well drafting. Subtle difference.

1 hour ago, Dappa Dan said:

What the hell are you talking about... A "coup"?... Oliver was a bolter. We're not talking about trading 3 first rounders for RG3 here ...

You're right Mahoney's a dunce, he thought he was trading up so Taylor could take Walter Payton at 4.  Imagine his surprise when that didn't happen!