6 hours ago, Lampers said:

It looks to me like the list management team have a firm goal which is build a list that has depth of types of players who are fit role types of roles - and there are some types of players that are missing key attributes for the broader playing style brand of contested footy.

The strategy looks like:

A) value relatively known quantity players that fit a need higher than haggling over draft pick positions give or take (within reason, I’m sure Taylor’s view on likely available talent is part of the picture and it’s a different in the top 10 where elite juniors are)

B) if a player is surplus to depth, or there are equivalent other options (e.g. state league prospects) instead that are cheaper, extract value for those players by trading them

C) if a player is not quite right because they aren’t contested enough or have other fatal flaws for the “brand” or there are personality issues, delist or trade them and give an opportunity to someone else

Preuss is an A) as were Melksham and Hibberd.

Tyson is a B) and you could argue they have decided Hogan is also a B.

Watts and Bugg are C) and in hindsight re-signing Garlett might have been a departure from strategy and an error.

And of course Melbourne’s don’t hold all the cards so a St. Kilda can upset things by offering Kent more security, and surprise opportunities may present themselves and need consideration (e.g. Lewis, move up the draft order near the start by helping a club with volume of lower draft picks for academy or father-son prospects).

Obvious gaps we as fans could identify prior to trade period are a ruckman, reliable 1on1 tall defender, and outside pace and polish. Every rumoured move Melbourne are initiating appears to be driving towards those things and is giving up something that can be covered through existing players, or not much perceived value (e.g. some mid to later order draft picks or pick downgrades).

I’m not saying the goal or strategy is correct, but for the most part their actions have been consistently aligned with this.

So we might look at a deal and think “We got unders and gave overs” but I doubt the Demons are thinking that if it fits with their strategy.

Solid post and agree with most of that (I don’t agree that re-signing my man Jeffy was a mistake  ) Mahoney confirmed on the club website that we are chasing those three areas you mentioned and rightly so.

i like Preuss’s physicality in the little I’ve seen of him. I can see why the club would be into him. But it’s worth recognising that a straight swap for Tyson in the absence of a swap of picks is certainly unders from our end, whether or not it fits into the strategy. Preuss for me is a fourth round pick given he couldn’t manage a senior game last season. Tyson on output this season and the weight of his careeer is a late second.

Vanders re-signing lessens the concerns around midfield depth, although Tyson leaving will test it that little bit more. The flipside is that there isn’t an abundance of ready to go ruckmen laying about, and if Preuss does turn out to be the goods then we have a ruck duo in place for the foreseeable future which is important to lock away. So I understand the need. I’m just acknowledging that we would be providing overs to get him.

As long as GC accept 8 for May, then i'm not fussed getting 8 and 11 for JH

On 10/10/2018 at 7:27 AM, Frustrated Demon said:

I like it. I think it’s a win win scenario. They obviously want an inside mid and we need a 2nd ruck/forward. Won’t honestly know who won that deal for another 3years. Let’s hope this happens soon.

 Preuss is going to surprise...this pre-season is more than just playing and readiness for his normal game - North currently do not develop players well and whilst there are exceptions, they tend to rely on big picks, low numbers in drafts, existing levels of skills and attributes. Now they wish to bring the biggest dollars into the game as this recruitment factor is taking over their FD competencies. Just like a kid in a lollyshop with his weekly allowance. Whereas the Dees have largely relied on internal development as a Roos legacy and it is continuing. There are 3 or 4 potential forwards, for example, that could goal more frequently and assuredly than Hoges. Similar numbers exist for our effective or potentially effective defenders. The acquisition of Preuss adds a whole new dimension to our achievement. The retention of Vanders embosses that dimension, as well. This is a win-win _ win situation, in effect.

19 hours ago, P-man said:

We're getting the raw end if it's a straight swap for Preuss. Up to the wrist. Not quite the elbow.

Somewhere along the way the rhetoric around Tyson changed to him becoming a no hoper. The reality is that as an inside mid he is a starter in the vast majority of teams.

Some mentioned the salary cap relief and that's now a big thing, the AFL even admitted this year for the first time they'll allow salary cap dumps (done in the NBA all the time). So the $200k or so we'll save this year having Preuss instead of Tyson will allow us more cap to resign some of the guys coming out of contract next year (Salem, Weid, ANB and Melky being the most pressing - unless Hogan stays), or might allow us to go after a 'big fish' fish next year. We'll also have Lewis and Jones coming out of contract plus maybe some savings form Hogan so 2019 could be a big trading year cause we should have a heap of cap space. 

6 minutes ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Some mentioned the salary cap relief and that's now a big thing, the AFL even admitted this year for the first time they'll allow salary cap dumps (done in the NBA all the time). So the $200k or so we'll save this year having Preuss instead of Tyson will allow us more cap to resign some of the guys coming out of contract next year (Salem, Weid, ANB and Melky being the most pressing - unless Hogan stays), or might allow us to go after a 'big fish' fish next year. We'll also have Lewis and Jones coming out of contract plus maybe some savings form Hogan so 2019 could be a big trading year cause we should have a heap of cap space. 

Which is good because Clarry deserves close to a mil soon. 

3 hours ago, DemonLad5 said:

As long as GC accept 8 for May, then i'm not fussed getting 8 and 11 for JH

Yeah agree. It really depends what they are wanting.

Tyson = Preuss

6 hours ago, Is Dom Is Good said:

Yeah agree. It really depends what they are wanting.

Might not need a new username just yet  

I wouldn't be totally against Tyson for Preuss, we need a decent back up ruckman to take the pressure off Max and Braydon is the best option out there. Maybe we could try to bargain for a swap of picks to improve our position somewhere in the draft even if it's just third rounder or something.

Preuss and a pick in the 60s for Tyson happening this morning.

Personal conjecture or have you heard something?

Great result for us.

7 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Personal conjecture or have you heard something?

Herald Sun AFL update

8 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Personal conjecture or have you heard something?

Sam Edmond on SEN just said it.

20 hours ago, P-man said:

Solid post and agree with most of that (I don’t agree that re-signing my man Jeffy was a mistake  ) Mahoney confirmed on the club website that we are chasing those three areas you mentioned and rightly so.

i like Preuss’s physicality in the little I’ve seen of him. I can see why the club would be into him. But it’s worth recognising that a straight swap for Tyson in the absence of a swap of picks is certainly unders from our end, whether or not it fits into the strategy. Preuss for me is a fourth round pick given he couldn’t manage a senior game last season. Tyson on output this season and the weight of his careeer is a late second.

Vanders re-signing lessens the concerns around midfield depth, although Tyson leaving will test it that little bit more. The flipside is that there isn’t an abundance of ready to go ruckmen laying about, and if Preuss does turn out to be the goods then we have a ruck duo in place for the foreseeable future which is important to lock away. So I understand the need. I’m just acknowledging that we would be providing overs to get him.

I'd say that Jeffy, as much as I've loved him in the past, is a distinct and obvious outlier on our list. He lacks physicality and it's why, unless he rapidly improves his attack on the footy and/or man, will see him on the sidelines for the rest of his MFC career. He just simply doesn't align with our brand of football.

with this and kent we will have 2 picks in the 60's (round 4) hopefully we are using those for something of better value

4 minutes ago, Bates Mate said:

with this and kent we will have 2 picks in the 60's (round 4) hopefully we are using those for something of better value

Do you think Rankine might slide to us then?

Sam Edmund‏Verified account @SammyHeraldSun 48m48 minutes ago

 

 

Also hearing @melbournefc mid DomTyson for Preuss will be made official today. Tyson to @NMFCOfficial for Preuss and a pick in the 60s. If you're a Kangas person I reckon you love what your club has done this exchange period.

tyson to north for preuss and 62. put your money on it.

4 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Sam Edmund‏Verified account @SammyHeraldSun 48m48 minutes ago

 

 

Also hearing @melbournefc mid DomTyson for Preuss will be made official today. Tyson to @NMFCOfficial for Preuss and a pick in the 60s. If you're a Kangas person I reckon you love what your club has done this exchange period.

The biggest impact of this trade for either club is that it will bring much needed relief for Max Gawn.

Nice to snag a pick too.

Not overly happy trading a contracted best 22 player for a guy who played zero games this year and a useless pick.

Edited October 11, 20187 yr by TheoX

13 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Sam Edmund‏Verified account @SammyHeraldSun 48m48 minutes ago

 

 

Also hearing @melbournefc mid DomTyson for Preuss will be made official today. Tyson to @NMFCOfficial for Preuss and a pick in the 60s. If you're a Kangas person I reckon you love what your club has done this exchange period.

Would North fans be that happy about trading Preuss, though?  Outside of Goldstein their ruck stocks are pretty darn thin at the moment.

Happy with this deal.  I don't see Tyson as a best 22 player, and with the impending addition of KK, the hopeful return to form of Hunt and Stretch coming back from injury, they will get a run on the wings in 2019.  Tyson wasn't getting into a midfield of Viney, Oliver, Brayshaw and Harmes anyway.  

Basically, we need Preuss more than we need Tyson.

The common element of our trading..."what do we need more"

Sound thinking.

9 minutes ago, TheoX said:

Not overly happy trading a contracted best 22 player for a guy who played zero games this year and a useless pick.

You need to retrain how your brain works. 

Tyson is purely an inside mid.  He's behind Oliver, Viney, Brayshaw, and Harmes, which is why he was pushed out to a wing.  If we had a decent outside runner he wouldn't have been playing finals.  Kolodjashnij will make life even tougher next year. 

If Gawn goes down we're cactus.  Being able to secure a young ruck entering his prime years is a massive coup.  We couldn't get better insurance. 

18 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

The biggest impact of this trade for either club is that it will bring much needed relief for Max Gawn.

Nice to snag a pick too.

Could be best long term outcome for Dees.  Big Maxy will now add another 2 to 3 years to his playing career and this deal will mean in the GF next year Max won't have to carry the load to his detriment, a la Grundy this year who tried manfully but was outplayed.