Trade and Free Agency rumours

[DistrACTION Jackson 9,230]

I'd like to see us identify the areas we aren't strong at and look to bolster these.

We all know we have an outstanding contested possession side and midfield. In my mind we lack in areas such as speed, skill and ball movement. A fit Salem and year older Bowey will go someway to fixing this, but I would like to see us try find some additional players either through the draft or trades with elite foot skills.

Obviously a KPF is an area of weakness, though there doesn't seem to be many on the market so we may have to make due with JVR and whatever we have. Gunston is obviously another that could be a good option for further forward depth, plus he has worked in high performing forward lines in the past so could bring some great ideas.

Edited September 20, 2022 by Action Jackson

[DeeSpencer 26,081]

5 hours ago, BAMF said:

I'm not disagreeing with you. But there are only 23 spots on the list per game.

You have to take into account that we had a good core group of players ready to go by 2015. We have then;

1.Traded in multiple best 23 players

2. Drafted very well in our first and second rounds.

3. Played pretty much the same best 23 players for three years straight.

You can argue that the third point is because no late picks have been good enough to push for selection. Or you could argue that it's because we nailed the first two points I listed and there isnt room for a late pick player to make it to 50 games.

If you had to choose, you would choose to get the first 2 things right than worry about the later picks.

That's absolutely true, and once again I'd reiterate my enormous thanks for JT and his team putting together a premiership 22 with their early selections and trades. 

I think we had a number of backline injuries early this year and only saw Hunt step back in to the 22, with Smith and Tomlinson given chances they didn't take. Similarly Dunstan and Bedford had a go and JJ played most of the year despite being a fairly limited player at this stage. Same for ANB, Spargo all the other whipping boys.

We didn't see much of Sparrow and JJ in year 2. They were hidden away in the hub but apparently playing very well in scratch matches and then burst in to the side in 2021 in year 3 with stronger bodies. I hope we've got or can find some youngsters who step forward in a hurry, I just haven't seen it from a long line or rookies and late picks so I don't have a lot of faith.

[DeeSpencer 26,081]

2 hours ago, JTR said:

If Bedford can bring what he does at Casey to AFL level (definitely think he can) then he'd replace one of Melksham/ANB/Spargo.

Same for Chandler who could also come in for one of those three.

Would be significant upgrades imo.

Melksham kicked 4 and dominated the grand final, looked a class above everyone else on the ground. If JVR played the game Melksham did on the weekend the demonland servers would be melted in to the ground.

ANB was a 35 touch running machine when he last played VFL.

The idea that either Chandler or Bedford would be significantly upgrades on anyone just isn't true.

Chandler might be a slight upgrade if he can drastically improve his defensive attention, improve his burst off the mark and start dishing quick handballs more often. Might. Bedford probably leaves, but won't have a long career if he decision making and composure don't drastically improve.

[ChaserJ 5,157]

Pies have delisted the Brown brothers and Liam McMahon.

McMahon was a 2nd round pick on potential in 2020, 198cm forward with a good leap. Pies are very conscious of cap space, think McMahon would be a good rookie candidate to see if he can develop into a low cost fwd option.

Edited September 20, 2022 by ChaserJ
Typo

[BangBnagBang 703]

19 hours ago, djr said:

If you think Jason Taylor has a poor track record beyond the first two rounds, you'll also think Stephen Wells, the other recruitment guru from Geelong, is a complete failure. Since 2013 Wells has had 24 picks after round 2 of which only 7 have managed to play a senior game. There are 2 standouts in that group, Menegola and Kolodjashnij. Taylor on the other hand has had only 14 picks of which 8 have played a senior game. Notables are Hunt, OMac, Hannan and Stretch. After the second round, chances of a player good enough to play even one  senior game is very low.

 

also has had way more misses in the first round than hits. 

[Mickey 4,731]

2 hours ago, BW511 said:

I did not think he played much permanent mid time on the weekend, however I was watching a little sporadically.

He didn't on the weekend, but has in the past. So has Bedford. But when they come in to the team, they are expected to perform as pressure forwards. 

[old55 23,687]

Heppell re-signed at Essendon rejecting a GC offer, I read somewhere here that Jayden may be their HB fall-back option.

[Mickey 4,731]

3 hours ago, old55 said:

Others have complained that the reverse is true, our young players don't play midfield at Casey. I think that's true - White, Munro and Dunstan carry the Casey midfield. And I think that's wise because if Chandler, Bedford or Laurie do come into the MFC side it's not going to be in the midfield, it's going to be in the forward roles they play at Casey. That's what they need to master.

I agree they should carry the midfield, but I don't think they're keeping anyone out. I just don't think we have the midfield depth at this stage to push them out. 

But that lack of depth also means Chandler and Bedford probably spending more time in there than they should. That might just be my perception, but it's an issue we've had previously. As you've said, players need to play in the roles they fit in the AFL, where possible. Or we are setting them up for failure

[BangBnagBang 703]

13 minutes ago, old55 said:

Heppell re-signed at Essendon rejecting a GC offer, I read somewhere here that Jayden may be their HB fall-back option.

I think GCS choose Long from Stk as there option

[Older demon 2,779]

7 hours ago, picket fence said:

Yep agree and he replaces????

Spargo or ANB or a really radical idea is to develop him into a Rioli at Richmond off half back role.

Edited September 20, 2022 by Older demon

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

Looks like GC is on a bit of a fire sale to free up salary cap space. I wonder who they will put on the market. Cannot see them letting go any of their core group… 

[Nascent 9,283]

Darcy Tucker officially requesting a trade to North Melbourne with one year left on his contract. Dockers happy to facilitate if it's a "mutually beneficial" outcome. 

With the newly awarded assistance package one would presume either Kangas assisted future 2nd or 3rd will be involved for one or both of Tucker and Logue.

 

Another Docker seeks move to North Melbourne… https://www.afl.com.au/news/847382/another-docker-seeks-move-to-north-melbourne

[inanunda 351]

11 minutes ago, CYB said:

Looks like GC is on a bit of a fire sale to free up salary cap space. I wonder who they will put on the market. Cannot see them letting go any of their core group… 

Get Sexton 

[Demonland 73,140]

 

[Demonland 73,140]

 

[Guest]

Not weighing into the debate regarding whether Jason Taylor or Stephen Wells are any good, or at what stage of the draft they excel at. But I do have a question. I assume national recruiting managers report to the head of the footy department? How does that person assess job performance? The basics would be having a solid program of scouting and due diligence. But some players get contact ACLs, and others eventually want to go home after possibly stating their genuine excitement of moving to a new city. 

In short, how do you determine the worth of a recruiter's performance on an annual basis when it often takes years to learn if any given player is any good, not to mention other factors such as club development issues and injuries? Are there clear instances of recruiters staying on for too long (Dorado will be mentioned, but what has he done wrong?), or replacements completely transforming a side after taking on the role? It seems to the major factor is not completely [censored] up on early speculative picks. 

[Adam The God 30,411]

16 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

No, the coach who realises that an offensive game plan helps win games of footy.

Right and are you suggesting that's a better path than the bloke who won the premiership last year?

Edited September 20, 2022 by A F

[Demonland 73,140]

 

[Demonland 73,140]

 

[Demonland 73,140]

 

[ChaserJ 5,157]

1 minute ago, Demonland said:

 

One of three that came to mind when I heard that GC might be willing to trade out players that you wouldn’t expect to see on the block.

Wouldn’t be surprised to see Flanders go as well. Joel Jeffrey the one I’d be keen on getting out (unlikely, especially now that Rankine is out).

[Axis of Bob 11,845]

18 minutes ago, Skuit said:

n short, how do you determine the worth of a recruiter's performance on an annual basis when it often takes years to learn if any given player is any good, not to mention other factors such as club development issues and injuries?

It's not just that, either. A recruiter's job is to identify the best talent but the player selection also depends on what the priorities of the football department are and the strategy that they're going for. 

For instance, you mention Essendon. I have mates tell me that Essendon's recruiting has been good and then mention the successes they've had. They're mostly right too, but selecting good players is only part of that puzzle because they now have a midfield of Parish, McGrath, Merrett and Shiel ..... 4 individually good players but also nobody over 6 feet tall nor defensively inclined. Then they get smashed every week in contested possession and end up losing. Essendon has selected a team of players whose whole is less than the sum of the parts.

How much of that problem is with the rest of the football department's strategy for selecting players, and how much is the recruiter overvaluing the attributes demonstrated by smaller midfielders over the attributes of bigger midfielders? 

[Lord Travis 10,763]

23 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

That's an interesting one. I had him as a SuperCoach smokey a few years back so kept a keen eye on him. He played some decent footy 2-3 years back and was developing well. He's very much a run and kick player with decent skills. He was shifted from midfield to backline as GC brought in top draft picks like Noah Anderson and Matt Rowell and was less effective back there. 

As he's a good kick, I'd be all for chasing him if we could get him cheap. Would be a decent option on an opposing wing to Langdon IMO.

[Fat Tony 5,262]

7 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

It's not just that, either. A recruiter's job is to identify the best talent but the player selection also depends on what the priorities of the football department are and the strategy that they're going for. 

For instance, you mention Essendon. I have mates tell me that Essendon's recruiting has been good and then mention the successes they've had. They're mostly right too, but selecting good players is only part of that puzzle because they now have a midfield of Parish, McGrath, Merrett and Shiel ..... 4 individually good players but also nobody over 6 feet tall nor defensively inclined. Then they get smashed every week in contested possession and end up losing. Essendon has selected a team of players whose whole is less than the sum of the parts.

How much of that problem is with the rest of the football department's strategy for selecting players, and how much is the recruiter overvaluing the attributes demonstrated by smaller midfielders over the attributes of bigger midfielders? 

The Bombers have realised the problem and that's why they targeted Dunkley last year. That said, you are correct that they look at each deal/draft pick in isolation rather than looking to find better balance.

We certainly benefited from early picks and the initial decision to target bulls at the top end of the draft. (Thank you Paul Roos.) It is easy to go for the icing once you have the cake (Petracca, Oliver, Brayshaw and Viney).

 

[Demon Disciple 12,274]

52 minutes ago, A F said:

Right and are you suggesting that's a better path than the bloke who won the premiership last year?

I’m suggesting that if Goody had been open minded about attacking a bit more, instead of being so uncompromising in changing his game plan, we may have gone further than we did this year.

Sure there’s extenuating circumstances, but after 10-0 only to finish going out in straight sets, some things need to be altered. Whenever we got a decent lead in a game, continuing to attack seemed to be the last thing we wanted to do. Instead, we entered a mode of trying not to lose the game.