WELCOME TO DEMONLAND - ADAM TOMLINSON

[hardtack 10,537]

14 hours ago, rjay said:

Not sure you've worded this too well 'Unleash', but if we're not recruiting based on observed performances than we are truly screwed...

But we’re equally as screwed if we base our recruiting purely on their last outing as some here would do... I don’t think that one game out of 80 is sampling at its best ?

[rjay 24,917]

20 minutes ago, hardtack said:

But we’re equally as screwed if we base our recruiting purely on their last outing as some here would do... I don’t think that one game out of 80 is sampling at its best ?

Not saying that at all 'hardtack', I'm sure our recruiting strategy is based on his AFL performances over his career and then what they think he can do going forward.

Those just looking at Saturday night really have no idea.

[TRIGON 4,783]

9 minutes ago, rjay said:

Not saying that at all 'hardtack', I'm sure our recruiting strategy is based on his AFL performances over his career and then what they think he can do going forward.

Those just looking at Saturday night really have no idea.

Agree with you rjay. On that basis Lachie Whitfield's not much chop either.

[hardtack 10,537]

41 minutes ago, rjay said:

Not saying that at all 'hardtack', I'm sure our recruiting strategy is based on his AFL performances over his career and then what they think he can do going forward.

Those just looking at Saturday night really have no idea.

Sorry if there was a misunderstanding there rjay... my reply was not directed at you, but rather, it was an extrapolation of what you said.

[Superunknown 4,217]

2 hours ago, AshleyH30 said:

If you're assuming that I like mediocrity, you're dead wrong. I see what this season is; a complete disaster, but I also see that there are only a few areas we need to fix to return to the finals. We've overhauled our coaching and fitness department; something I've thought we've been due for, for a couple of seasons. Tomlinson, Langdon, etc are what we need. Sure, they're not world beaters, but show me a world beater that has moved clubs in the last few years other than for the go home factor (ala Dangerfield).

Wasn’t a shot at you at all

[AshleyH30 566]

10 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

Wasn’t a shot at you at all

Okey, it was hard to tell who you were directing the comment too as you just stated "those two." I thought you were referring to me and the poster I was replying to.

Edited September 17, 2019 by AshleyH30

[Watts the matter 1,235]

5 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Bernie Vince was a sensational pick up for the club.  Jeff Garlett was also a ripping get for the club, considering we gave up practically nothing to get him and he had a few 40 goal seasons for us.

We gave up a second round pick to get Frost, a third rounder and a fourth rounder, so I'd like to think we won that trade, while letting Dunn go was the right move.  He couldn't, and some speculate wouldn't, play in the role we wanted him to down back.

The fringe players failing means nothing - he went for some depth in the hope one or two might work out.  They didn't.  The Ben Kennedy deal was disappointing, true, but you can't get everything right.

I'm 50/50 on the Kelly trade - of course I'd rather have him, but Roos had a decision to make at the time.  We needed as many players who were ready to go on our list in 2014, and moving back a few places in the draft while also adding Tyson made sense at the time.  I can understand why we did it.  Again, I'd rather Kelly, but there were legitimate reasons behind the trade.

I agree with most (if not all) of what you have said, but how would you rate our recruitment under Roos?

While Vince was fantastic for us, Adelaide would have been over the moon landing Matt Crouch in that trade. Unfortunately with our circumstances we needed Vince at that time.

The Tom Bugg trade (upgrading pick 10 to pick 7) to get Weideman was another poor trade, (the first part to upgrade to Oliver and use our future pick was brilliant).

Our recruitment during his tenure overall was not disastrous, but it was far from amazing. 

[Moonshadow 17,676]

Ain't hindsight a wonderful skill!

[Billy 2,529]

4 hours ago, hardtack said:

But we’re equally as screwed if we base our recruiting purely on their last outing as some here would do... I don’t think that one game out of 80 is sampling at its best ?

There’s no better way to show your desire for the footy than in a cut throat final

He was unsighted from the first bounce 

4 kicks 3 handballs at 42% 

No thanks 

[Watts the matter 1,235]

1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

Ain't hindsight a wonderful skill!

It's what you do in football, review and analyse things that have happened. What do you suggest? Not form an opinion about something because it happened in the past or the club got it wrong? 

 

[binman 42,903]

1 hour ago, Watts the matter said:

I agree with most (if not all) of what you have said, but how would you rate our recruitment under Roos?

While Vince was fantastic for us, Adelaide would have been over the moon landing Matt Crouch in that trade. Unfortunately with our circumstances we needed Vince at that time.

The Tom Bugg trade (upgrading pick 10 to pick 7) to get Weideman was another poor trade, (the first part to upgrade to Oliver and use our future pick was brilliant).

Our recruitment during his tenure overall was not disastrous, but it was far from amazing. 

I agree. Not disastrous, but far from amazing sums it up perfectly. 

I supported the decision to split pick 3 at the time as i saw the logic to bring in a couple of quality players given where we were at.

Hindsight is wonderful thing but even so history says the club pulled the wrong rein in not taking Kelly (as i posted elsewhere, the 'we would have taken Billings' palaver is a complete furphy - taking Billings over Kelly would have been the wrong move so not sure how that helps the argument. And besides Billings is a good player).

But the real mistake in that trade was getting Tyson. Not so much in terms of his ability (though his many critics have been been somewhat vindicated given we traded him for not much and he can't get game av the Roos), more in the type of player is he is - a contested, inside player with average foot skills. A type we have a surfeit of. We needed silk and we got whatever the opposite is. 

The type of player we recruited under roos (and continued to recruit under goody) has created a problem for us. Which is why i get a little annoyed at Roos distancing himself from where we are at. 

[Lucifers Hero 39,747]

49 minutes ago, binman said:

I agree. Not disastrous, but far from amazing sums it up perfectly. 

I supported the decision to split pick 3 at the time as i saw the logic to bring in a couple of quality players given where we were at.

Hindsight is wonderful thing but even so history says the club pulled the wrong rein in not taking Kelly (as i posted elsewhere, the 'we would have taken Billings' palaver is a complete furphy - taking Billings over Kelly would have been the wrong move so not sure how that helps the argument. And besides Billings is a good player).

But the real mistake in that trade was getting Tyson. Not so much in terms of his ability (though his many critics have been been somewhat vindicated given we traded him for not much and he can't get game av the Roos), more in the type of player is he is - is - a contested, inside player with average foot skills.  A type we have a surfeit of. We needed silk and we got whatever the opposite is. 

The type of player we recruited under roos (and continued to recruit under goody) has created a problem for us. Which is why i get a little annoyed at Roos distancing himself from where we are at. 

The full trade was:

• Out: pick 2 (Kelly), 20 (Gardiner - Lions), 72 (GWS passed)
• In:  Tyson/Preuss, pick 9 (Salem), pick 53 (Hunt).

At the time we took Tyson we did not have "a surfeit of contested, inside player with average foot skills" as you claim. Our midfield was held together by Jones, Vince and a very young Viney.  Sure Jones/Viney can't kick either but we compounded the problem by not using Salem in the middle as he was needed as an attacking defender.  

Tyson was top 5 in our BnF and played in the 2019 Prelim.  He was good for us for 5 years in the role he was recruited for.  He couldn't adapt to an outside role but that does not make it a poor decision to recruit him 5 years earlier.  And now we have Preuss giving us a much more balanced team.

Salem is about to reach his peak and Hunt has been more than serviceable. 

Sure, Kelly is a gun but where would we be if we had taken him at 2?   Probably won more games than we did in 2014/2015 and not have the top picks to get all of Petracca, Brayshaw, Oliver. 

The silk (footy IQ and field kicking) we had with Roos has been traded out by Goodwin (and not replaced):  Watts, Hogan.  Just for the record, in terms of pace Roos recruited Hunt and Garlett. 

imv he left us a list which had much greater talent, skill, speed and balance than the one we have today. 

And if anyone wants to criticise the trade the pick of the bunch was The Bont so people should stop fixating on Kelly.

Its just so easy to cherry pick the parts of the story that suit your narrative:  recruiting by Roos was poor and left us without the 'silk'!

Edited September 17, 2019 by Lucifer's Hero

[Watts the matter 1,235]

10 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

The full trade was:

• Out: pick 2 (Kelly), 20 (Gardiner - Lions), 72 (GWS passed)
• In:  Tyson/Preuss, pick 9 (Salem), pick 53 (Hunt).

At the time we took Tyson we did not have "a surfeit of contested, inside player with average foot skills" as you claim. Our midfield was held together by Jones, Vince and a very young Viney.  Sure Jones/Viney can't kick either but we compounded the problem by not using Salem in the middle as he was needed as an attacking defender.  

Tyson was top 5 in our BnF and played in the 2019 Prelim.  He was good for us for 5 years in the role he was recruited for.  He couldn't adapt to an outside role but that does not make it a poor decision to recruit him 5 years earlier.  And now we have Preuss giving us a much more balanced team.

Salem is about to reach his peak and Hunt has been more than serviceable. 

Sure, Kelly is a gun but where would we be if we had taken him at 2?   Probably won more games than we did in 2014/2015 and not have the top picks to get all of Petracca, Brayshaw, Oliver. 

The silk (footy IQ and field kicking) we had with Roos has been traded out by Goodwin (and not replaced):  Watts, Hogan.  Just for the record, in terms of pace Roos recruited Hunt and Garlett. 

imv he left us a list which had much greater talent, skill, speed and balance than the one we have today. 

And if anyone wants to criticise the trade the pick of the bunch was The Bont so people should stop fixating on Kelly.

Its just so easy to cherry pick the parts of the story that suit your narrative:  recruiting by Roos was poor and left us without the 'silk'!

I agree with much of what you said, but the Salem part is BS, he is not a midfielder because he is not good enough to be a midfielder. 

[Lucifers Hero 39,747]

6 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

I agree with much of what you said, but the Salem part is BS, he is not a midfielder because he is not good enough to be a midfielder. 

You could be right, but he has only played a handful of games there so not much opportunity to show what he can do.   iirc his only midfield stint was early 2018 and was moved to defence when Brayshaw came back into the team.

For mine he could be the Sam Michell type of midfielder: tough as, not fast but smart enough to find space and time to hit up a target or put the ball to advantage of team mate. 

Edited September 17, 2019 by Lucifer's Hero

[binman 42,903]

3 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

The full trade was:

• Out: pick 2 (Kelly), 20 (Gardiner - Lions), 72 (GWS passed)
• In:  Tyson/Preuss, pick 9 (Salem), pick 53 (Hunt).

At the time we took Tyson we did not have "a surfeit of contested, inside player with average foot skills" as you claim. Our midfield was held together by Jones, Vince and a very young Viney.  Sure Jones/Viney can't kick either but we compounded the problem by not using Salem in the middle as he was needed as an attacking defender.  

Tyson was top 5 in our BnF and played in the 2019 Prelim.  He was good for us for 5 years in the role he was recruited for.  He couldn't adapt to an outside role but that does not make it a poor decision to recruit him 5 years earlier.  And now we have Preuss giving us a much more balanced team.

Salem is about to reach his peak and Hunt has been more than serviceable. 

Sure, Kelly is a gun but where would we be if we had taken him at 2?   Probably won more games than we did in 2014/2015 and not have the top picks to get all of Petracca, Brayshaw, Oliver. 

The silk (footy IQ and field kicking) we had with Roos has been traded out by Goodwin (and not replaced):  Watts, Hogan.  Just for the record, in terms of pace Roos recruited Hunt and Garlett. 

imv he left us a list which had much greater talent, skill, speed and balance than the one we have today. 

And if anyone wants to criticise the trade the pick of the bunch was The Bont so people should stop fixating on Kelly.

Its just so easy to cherry pick the parts of the story that suit your narrative:  recruiting by Roos was poor and left us without the 'silk'!

You make some good points LH.

As i said i supported the decision to split pick two at the time and for several years afterwards. I'm not critical of the decision - as i said  i saw the logic to bring in a couple of quality players given where we were at. But i am also firmly of the view that with the benefit of hindsight it was the wrong call. 

You're right about the Bont - in hindsight we should have drafted him (though i think Kelly will end his career the equal of Bont).

However, i wish you would stop misrepresenting my views. I did not say - and have not said - the recruiting under Roos was poor, so i i completely refute your claims that i am pushing a narrative that it was. In the post you quoted i agreed with the view that under Roos recruiting was 'not disastrous, but far from amazing'. Again, hardly a severe criticism of Roos. 

At the risk of misrepresenting your views you appear very sensitive about any criticisms of Roos, even measured non controversial criticism.   

[Cards13 9,117]

3 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Ain't hindsight a wonderful skill!

Seeeeee I told you so!

[Lucifers Hero 39,747]

31 minutes ago, binman said:

You make some good points LH.

As i said i supported the decision to split pick two at the time and for several years afterwards. I'm not critical of the decision - as i said  i saw the logic to bring in a couple of quality players given where we were at. But i am also firmly of the view that with the benefit of hindsight it was the wrong call. 

You're right about the Bont - in hindsight we should have drafted him (though i think Kelly will end his career the equal of Bont).

However, i wish you would stop misrepresenting my views. I did not say - and have not said - the recruiting under Roos was poor, so i i completely refute your claims that i am pushing a narrative that it was. In the post you quoted i agreed with the view that under Roos recruiting was 'not disastrous, but far from amazing'. Again, hardly a severe criticism of Roos. 

At the risk of misrepresenting your views you appear very sensitive about any criticisms of Roos, even measured non controversial criticism.   

I'm not sensitive to criticisms of Roos at all but I will call out posts that present opinion as fact as the basis for criticism ie " But the real mistake in that trade was getting Tyson. Not so much in terms of his ability... more in the type of player is he is - is - a contested, inside player with average foot skills.  A type we have a surfeit of. We needed silk and we got whatever the opposite is".

My post described why that comment is and was not correct, based not on hindsight but on the facts at the time the decisions were made and that the criticism of Roos based on that comment are unfounded.

Anyway, I'm out on this.

Edited September 17, 2019 by Lucifer's Hero

[Moonshadow 17,676]

Anyhoo.... about this Tomlison fellow.

Has he signed yet?

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

21 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Anyhoo.... about this Tomlison fellow.

Has he signed yet?

 

Apparently not ment to even able to talk to free agents until October.

#aflintegrity 

[dazzledavey36 54,866]

ADAM TOMLINSON (GWS)

Had a trainwreck final with just 24 ranking points and one effective kick. But won’t stop Melbourne throwing big dollars at him and they see him playing on a wing.

GWS couldn’t love his selflessness and attitude more, but just don’t have the cash to keep him.

[binman 42,903]

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I'm not sensitive to criticisms of Roos at all but I will call out posts that present opinion as fact as the basis for criticism ie " But the real mistake in that trade was getting Tyson. Not so much in terms of his ability... more in the type of player is he is - is - a contested, inside player with average foot skills.  A type we have a surfeit of. We needed silk and we got whatever the opposite is".

My post described why that comment is and was not correct, based not on hindsight but on the facts at the time the decisions were made and that the criticism of Roos based on that comment are unfounded.

Anyway, I'm out on this.

Gives me the opportunity to have the last word then (so i'll make it count).

Firstly, it is a given that it is my opinion that that selecting Tyson as part of that deal was a mistake, not a fact. It would get tiresome if every time someone posted a comment on DL they prefaced with it 'in my opinion'. 

Secondly YOUR opinion is that i am factually incorrect to say 'more in the type of player he is - a contested, inside player with average foot skills.  A type we have a surfeit of. We needed silk and we got whatever the opposite is' 

You go on to to say your opinion is based not on hindsight but on the facts at the time the decisions were made and that the criticism of Roos based on that comment are unfounded.

Well i'm sorry, but in MY opinion you are wrong and the facts do not support your argument.

In 2013, when Roos decided to split pick 2 and give up the opportunity to get Kelly, Billings or the Bont (a decision i stress that i supported at the time and in the following years) we had the following players on our list who could be fairly described as a contested, inside player with average foot skills.

•    Nathan Jones    
•   Jimmy Toumpas
•   Jack Grimes    
•   Jack Viney    
•   Jack Trengove
•   Jordie McKenzie
•   Luke Tapscott  
•   Matt Jones 

To that list Roos decided to add two more contested, inside players with average foot skills:

• Dom Tyson 
• Viv Michie  

That's 10 contested, inside player with average foot skills. We can argue about the word surfeit but in my opinion that is too many and created a list imbalance that persists to this day (and i fully agree that Goodwin has done nothing to address this issue. Nor did Roos for that matter, doubling down in the following draft and trading periods). This is why so desperately need a player like Brad Hill now. 

In that draft Roos (well his recruiting team) also added:

• Bernie Vince (great foot skills, but an inside player and slow)
• Jayden Hunt  (an outside player, with speed but poor foot skills)
• Jay Kennedy Harris (an outside player with average foot skills)
• Christian Salem (an inside player, with elite foot skills but slow)

Looking at the list we started 2014 with (thanks Demonwiki - what a magnificent website, a treasure) - the first year of the Roos era-  we only had the following three players i would describe as 'silk' ie outside players, who can cover ground with elite foot skills (i don't count Hogan in this category):

• Jack Watts
• Dom Barry (5 games)
• James Strauss (0 games)

And to top that off in terms of elite kicks you could only add Shannon Brynes, Salem and Jetta. Meaning on list of 52 players we only had 6 elite kick and only two of them played more than 6 games.

The other relevant issue about the decision to not go to the draft with pick 2 was that you rightly say the deal also involved us giving up pick 20. We could have used both picks 2 and 20 to address our lack of silk. Two could have got us Kelly. And pick 20 could have got us Jarmen Impey (who went at pick 21).  
 

[Lord Nev 13,512]

Lachie Whitfield looms as the biggest free agent of the 2020 class and Lyon wants the Dees to go “all in” on him.

“Here’s some unsolicited advice to the Demons. Save your money,” he told SEN Breakfast.

“Save your money with Tomlinson and go all in on Whitfield. All in.

“Get everything out.”

Lyon urges Demons to go "all in" on star 2020 free agent

 

[Moonshadow 17,676]

GWS have had reasonable results of late at keeping stars. They'd desperately want to keep their midfield core 

[Wiseblood 24,637]

2 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

GWS have had reasonable results of late at keeping stars. They'd desperately want to keep their midfield core 

And you run the risk of chasing him and then having him re-sign with GWS.  I know some might say that he is worth the risk, but then we've missed out on others who could potentially help to improve our side.

If we asked the question and he legit seemed keen, then I'd be happy to go all in for him.  But it's never as easy as that.  

[binman 42,903]

Agree that he us exactly the sort of player we need. Close to the best kick in the league and a beautiful mover. Silk.

But surely getting Tomlinson won't impact our chances of getting Whitfield. Won't cost us a draft pick and not too much salary space.