I know this is a rumour thread but sorry I have to address the midfield talk. I love the input both binman and his pa put into this forum and yes we have a very good midfield and yes you could argue that our best four our the best.  But I for one don’t just look at four players as a midfield and for me when you include the wings and some rotations our midfield is not the best. Collingwood’s midfield is / was better than ours this year, their disposal efficiency in particular is much better than ours and they have a better balance and have smarter players than ours. 
 

Coll Disp Eff     Kick Eff     Hand B Eff

ND      75.1        69.2           81.5

JDG    71.1         61.1            81.6

SP       73.6       68.5           79.3

JC       71.5        61.9           82.4

JD       71.2        64.6          79.5

DC      67.5        53.2          85.5

TM      72.9       60.8          80.5

SS       67.1        61.1            76.9

Av        71.25     62.55        80.9

Melb

CP       66.8       55             78.8

CO       67.2       52.2          817

MG       61.6      50.9           78.5

JV         61         49.5           73

AB        73.4      66              81

TS        70.1        58.7           83.5

EL         72.2       63.2          83.5

LH         66.4       56.5          79.6

Av          67.34     56.51         79.95

Our midfielders kicking is miles off that of Collingwood’s, six out of eight of their core midfield group average over 60% we have two and JV didn’t even average 50%  

Our midfield is very good but it needs improving from both personal and coaching to maximise our strengths  

 

1 hour ago, ANG13 said:

Our midfield is very good but it needs improving from both personal and coaching to maximise our strengths  

This is fair and I agree.

7 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

horse is gonna be hoarse from all the yelling he does at poor old dean cox when grundy is standing in the middle of the scg not pushing forward nor back

 

6 hours ago, Demonsterative said:

Grundy will be doing a light jog, sometimes moving into a light sprint back and forth, miss reading the flight of the ball. 

Ah now i get it.

That's why he (allegedly) prefers the Swans (SCG dimensions).

5 hours ago, drdrake said:

With Sydney seeming to be going after a few players, do we go after pick 11 for Grundy with our dockers second round pick

There is no way we get pick 11 for Grundy.  

I think 31 goes to Pies and they’ll offer us 23. 

4 hours ago, ANG13 said:

I know this is a rumour thread but sorry I have to address the midfield talk. I love the input both binman and his pa put into this forum and yes we have a very good midfield and yes you could argue that our best four our the best.  But I for one don’t just look at four players as a midfield and for me when you include the wings and some rotations our midfield is not the best. Collingwood’s midfield is / was better than ours this year, their disposal efficiency in particular is much better than ours and they have a better balance and have smarter players than ours. 
 

Coll Disp Eff     Kick Eff     Hand B Eff

ND      75.1        69.2           81.5

JDG    71.1         61.1            81.6

SP       73.6       68.5           79.3

JC       71.5        61.9           82.4

JD       71.2        64.6          79.5

DC      67.5        53.2          85.5

TM      72.9       60.8          80.5

SS       67.1        61.1            76.9

Av        71.25     62.55        80.9

Melb

CP       66.8       55             78.8

CO       67.2       52.2          817

MG       61.6      50.9           78.5

JV         61         49.5           73

AB        73.4      66              81

TS        70.1        58.7           83.5

EL         72.2       63.2          83.5

LH         66.4       56.5          79.6

Av          67.34     56.51         79.95

Our midfielders kicking is miles off that of Collingwood’s, six out of eight of their core midfield group average over 60% we have two and JV didn’t even average 50%  

Our midfield is very good but it needs improving from both personal and coaching to maximise our strengths  

 

Why did you have to show this on demonland?! 

Begone with this information! Our mids are untouchable, the best in the league by a mile and we don't need any of that to show otherwise thanks! 

 

6 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

There is no way we get pick 11 for Grundy.  

I think 31 goes to Pies and they’ll offer us 23. 

Agree, we gave up a pick in the late 20s for Grundy 12 months ago and there is no way he would demand a pick in the teens now after the season he had.

Interesting stats @ANG13. They make sense with the respective game styles. We play 1-short at the stoppage so there is less opportunity for us to find a free man when we have the ball and more opportunity for the opposition to find a free man when they have the ball. The extra time and space allowing for more efficient disposal.

I have a feeling we will go hard at the draft this year and I would be comfortable with us trading a first round pick next year to give us three top 15-20 picks this year.

I wonder if GC will be happy to swap pick 4 & 5 if we give them an extra pick?

Will we package up a few picks to pry pick 7 from Geelong?

Can we also get a hold of a pick around 15-20 using our future first?

Imagine we end up with:

Pick 4 (likely pick 6) - take your pick from McKercher/Duursma/Sanders

Pick 7 (likely pick 9 or 10) - Connor O'Sullivan

Late teens pick - Windosr/Wilson/Leake/Tholstrup

4th pick - Kynan Brown

We can then go hard at trading next season, which may have better options.

 

8 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

There is no way we get pick 11 for Grundy.  

I think 31 goes to Pies and they’ll offer us 23. 

Yup agree,  23 is a very good outcome if we get it!

30 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

I have a feeling we will go hard at the draft this year and I would be comfortable with us trading a first round pick next year to give us three top 15-20 picks this year.

I wonder if GC will be happy to swap pick 4 & 5 if we give them an extra pick?

Will we package up a few picks to pry pick 7 from Geelong?

Can we also get a hold of a pick around 15-20 using our future first?

Imagine we end up with:

Pick 4 (likely pick 6) - take your pick from McKercher/Duursma/Sanders

Pick 7 (likely pick 9 or 10) - Connor O'Sullivan

Late teens pick - Windosr/Wilson/Leake/Tholstrup

4th pick - Kynan Brown

We can then go hard at trading next season, which may have better options.

 

Top 20 are very good this year, I think we will aim to get as many picks as we can inside that.

Apparently we are keen on pick 10

8 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

There is no way we get pick 11 for Grundy.  

I think 31 goes to Pies and they’ll offer us 23. 

It wasn't just Grundy for 11 it was Grundy and our pick 25, even swap pick 33 for pick 44.

20 minutes ago, drdrake said:

It wasn't just Grundy for 11 it was Grundy and our pick 25, even swap pick 33 for pick 44.

Why would a club give up pick 11? 33 will be the pick 

pick 4 going to the dogs

4 minutes ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

pick 4 going to the dogs

More info from Tom Morris: https://x.com/tommorris32/status/1711162070253933027?s=46&t=uC9z4AjzfWvj5kf1WQ6J6g

46 minutes ago, drdrake said:

It wasn't just Grundy for 11 it was Grundy and our pick 25, even swap pick 33 for pick 44.

You are massively over valuing Grundy. Even with pick swaps included with Grundy, pick 11 will never be on the table.

We want him out of the club, so there'll be no hardball. A pick around the mark for what we paid is what we can expect back in return.

28 minutes ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

pick 4 going to the dogs

sure it’s not that bad. Oliver went at 4 a few years back!

 

*boom boom

13 hours ago, ANG13 said:

Our midfielders kicking is miles off that of Collingwood’s, six out of eight of their core midfield group average over 60% we have two and JV didn’t even average 50%  

Our midfield is very good but it needs improving from both personal and coaching to maximise our strengths  

This is the problem with statistics - they mean nothing if you don't know what you're measuring and why/if it's important. The kicking efficiency stat is practically worthless, IMHO, because of what is measures and how it assumes all situations where you kick the ball are the same.

Kicking efficiency is just whether or not a kick finds a team mate or if the kick goes to a contest 40+ metres away. So James Harmes' diagonal kick from the stoppage to Fritsch inside 50 midway through the 3rd quarter of the 2021 GF is judged as being exactly the same as a 40m backwards to a contest between Spargo and Tom Lynch 10m from your own defensive goal. Both kicks = effective. Also a centering kick over your shoulder to the top of the square is only effective if you kicked the ball over 40m, even if you intended it and it is 100% the right kick to do - and a chip backwards to an open player 15m away in defence is effective.

If you look at the top 10 players in disposal efficiency (minimum 10 games) all of them are defenders. Same with the top 20, and 30, and 40 and 50 ...... THE TOP 50 PLAYERS IN DISPOSAL EFFICIENCY IN 2023 ARE ALL DEFENDERS!!!! What are the chances of the top 50 kicks in the league playing in the backline? It goes further .... of the top 100 in disposal efficiency, 95 of them are defenders. The exceptions were Jackson Macrae, Jaspa Fletcher, Matt Johnson, Sam Petrevski-Seton and Eddie Ford.

If you look at that, disposal efficiency is far more a function of where you play and the situation you play in than it is of your ability to kick the football. This is the only real information that you can take from the Collingwood vs Melbourne kicking efficiency statistic: that the two teams play differently and put their midfielders into different situations than each other. 

I'd recommend this excellent article about kicking statistics if you want more information on what good kicking is and how bad kicking/disposal efficiency is as a statistic: How defining what makes a good kick in the AFL is always up for debate - ABC News

 

Edited October 9, 20231 yr by Axis of Bob

6 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

This is the problem with statistics - they mean nothing if you don't know what you're measuring and why/if it's important. The kicking efficiency stat is practically worthless, IMHO, because of what is measures and how it assumes all situations where you kick the ball are the same.

Kicking efficiency is just whether or not a kick finds a team mate or if the kick goes to a contest 40+ metres away. So James Harmes' diagonal kick from the stoppage to Fritsch inside 50 midway through the 3rd quarter of the 2021 GF is judged as being exactly the same as a 40m backwards to a contest between Spargo and Tom Lynch 10m from your own defensive goal. Both kicks = effective. Also a centering kick over your shoulder to the top of the square is only effective if you kicked the ball over 40m, even if you intended it and it is 100% the right kick to do - and a chip backwards to an open player 15m away in defence is effective.

If you look at the top 10 players in disposal efficiency (minimun 10 games) all of them are defenders. Same with the top 20, and 30, and 40 and 50 ...... THE TOP 50 PLAYERS IN DISPOSAL EFFICIENCY IN 2023 ARE ALL DEFENDERS!!!! What are the chances of the top 50 kicks in the league playing in the backline? It goes further .... of the top 100 in disposal efficiency, 95 of them are defenders. The exceptions were Jackson Macrae, Jaspa Fletcher, Matt Johnson, Sam Petrevski-Seton and Eddie Ford.

If you look at that, disposal efficiency is far more a function of where you player and the situation you play in than it is of your ability to kick the football.

I'd recommend this excellent article about kicking statistics if you want more information on what good kicking is and how bad kicking/disposal efficiency is as a statistic: How defining what makes a good kick in the AFL is always up for debate - ABC News

 

It’s also about game style - our mids are instructed (or they just prefer to) dump the ball long especially when entering the 50. The Pies are more methodical with their approach. 

Ok don’t think it is entirely to be dismissed- it’s indicative; just have to find out about what.

 

So if GC get those picks off WB it seems Adelaide will be well stocked to trade up too

Just now, roy11 said:

 

So if GC get those picks off WB it seems Adelaide will be well stocked to trade up too

Well based on this North are an absolute shoe in to get pick 3 for McKay

FA getting more generous with each year…

I hope we have a strong long at Geelongs pick 7 and Gold Coasts (likely) pick 10. Probably unlikely we land both particularly with Adelaide having an excellent draft hand now.

Edited October 9, 20231 yr by Nascent

11 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

There is no way we get pick 11 for Grundy.  

I think 31 goes to Pies and they’ll offer us 23. 

I agree pick 23 is the fair trade but if they are playing funny buggers and are thinking of offering pick 31 or low for a player with 4 years running they are kidding themselves.

Collingwood are asking for pick 23 also for Adams.

29 minutes ago, rpfc said:

It’s also about game style - our mids are instructed (or they just prefer to) dump the ball long especially when entering the 50. The Pies are more methodical with their approach. 

It's about the focus on contested football vs uncontested football. Collingwood is a less contested team through the midfield than we are, so it obviously leads to better kicking efficiency. 

Of those midfielders that were included in ANG13's stats, Melbourne's players averages 16% more contested disposals per game (10.0 vs 8.6) and their contested/uncontested possession % was +5 (ie, 44% of disposals were contested vs Collingwood's 39%). The top 3 contested players (by total and ratio) were Melbourne players (Oliver, Petracca and Viney).

The efficiency stat doesn't tell you how good a kick a player is because the bar for an 'effective' kick is incredibly low in certain circumstances and is therefore almost entirely reliant on the situation in which you are being asked to kick. Contested midfielders and forwards are under the most pressure with the ball so they have the lowest efficiency. That's the story. 

Using kicking efficiency as the measure of kicking ability is wrong. Either that or someone's going to have to convince me why Dougal Howard is the 4th best kick in the league.

Adelaide now have 9, 19, 22, 25

We have 13, 26, 34, 40

They are probably favourites to land pick 10 unless we use 13 in the deal.

I'm sure the club will manoeuvre up the boards as much as possible but equally, I wouldn't be surprised if we took 5 and 13 to the draft and trade our glut of 2nds for future picks, ports 1st for example.

Maybe a combination of both.

Trade to have 5 & 10, take Brown late. Then acquire ports first depending on leftover picks.