2 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

If you watch that play to the end, a handball would have seen Trac cut off by a quickly closing Quaynor.

Not sure I agree, Petracca was on the move and a well placed handball was an option. 

Grundy to Port for Ollie Lord

5 minutes ago, Dee tention said:

Grundy to Port for Ollie Lord

He's off to Sydney....

18 hours ago, JimmyGadson said:

It's both you goose. Clearly.

Our method means our players refuse to give the ball to team mates in more dangerous positions which would equate to better looks going inside 50 as well as shots on goal. 

You can't claim that we lost the game due to a few missed set shots but at the same time say it has nothing to do with method. Because there are missed opportunities at shots on goal in our method as well. 

Go and look at first crack and the vision that Montagna shows. Every game we play there are countless missed opportunities to change an angle or go inside to a free player which would open up so many opportunities for forward to lead to space and therefore opportunities for shots on goal. 

It's about honouring those at the right time so that we obviously still play our game plan. But we simply don't do it enough. And we possess players who simply aren't composed enough. 

You think you're contributing deep analysis when really your summation is that we lost due to a few missed set shots? Righto. 

Our method creates problems when faced against sides who know how to combat it. We have execution issues and have for a long time. We have a lacklustre and boring forwardline. Etc. The issues are multifaceted. 

 

Trac agrees with you, Steve

“I feel like the last three or four weeks we probably had a similar forward line and it’s worked really well so us mids need to get better at actually delivering the ball inside 50 better rather than blazing away and putting it on their heads.”
He added: “We won the inside-50 count, but I don’t think that was a true reflection on the game, you have probably got to look at quality over quantity and some of our efficiency stuff going in wasn’t great."

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/semi-final-sos-and-a-potential-grundy-return-blues-dees-mull-changes-20230910-p5e3hl.html

13 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

He's off to Sydney....

Makes sense as he won't have any competition with Hickey retiring. 

Add the fact Sydney have better Picks to use is also a bonus for us. Deal will drag on no doubt until the last day.

Can't see Sydney offloading one of McLean or Amartey.

Sydney have Picks 29, 30, 41, 49 to use

 

36 minutes ago, SthSea22 said:

Makes sense as he won't have any competition with Hickey retiring. 

Add the fact Sydney have better Picks to use is also a bonus for us. Deal will drag on no doubt until the last day.

Can't see Sydney offloading one of McLean or Amartey.

Sydney have Picks 29, 30, 41, 49 to use

 

From Zero Hangar

6 minutes ago, Viscount Cardwell said:

From Zero Hangar

From Draft Guru

8 minutes ago, Viscount Cardwell said:

From Zero Hangar

Round 2 pick for 9th place | Traded from Western Bulldogs in 2022 Lobb trade | Traded from Fremantle in 2022 Meek-O'Meara trade | Traded from Hawthorn in 2022 live pick trade.

I think its all well and good to say we should poach a forward, but the reality is that there are not many that we could get at this stage: 

• WCE will not trade Allen. He's under contract, young, from Perth and a potential future skipper. 
• Carlton will not trade Mackay, and it sounds like he doesn't want to leave either: https://www.afl.com.au/news/1025140/criticism-contract-and-finals-carlton-blues-gun-harry-mckay-opens-up-about-whirlwind-year.
• GC will not trade Ben King, and even if they were willing to do so, they have no use for high draft picks this year.  given their academy haul
• Max King is contracted to the end of the 2026 season, and St Kilda wouldn't let him go for picks 4 and 5 anyway.

We're also really tight on a salary cap level.  If Grundy leaves, that should free up some money, but not enough for a genuine, top 5-6 in the league key forward.   

If people are floating 800K for Ben Mackay, a genuine key forward is going to be a lot pricier.  We would have to look at a second rung, Chris Dawes, Ben Holland, Cam Pedersen type player, or a risky option, like a player returning from a significant injury, at that price.  I don't know who that would be, but its unlikely that it will be a silver bullet in any case. 

I also don't think this is necessarily poor drafting or trading by melbourne that has got us where we are. We've been looking for a big bodied key tall for a long time, but we've had some bad luck.  We've:

• brought in Jesse Hogan, Sam Weideman, Luke Jackson, Van Rooyen, Matt Jefferson n through the draft.  Two of them left for the west, one is a best 22 player at 20 years old, one is too young to be anything, and one of them didn't cut through as a forward.  
• brought Ben Brown and Josh Schache through trades, one of whom was a hail mary, and the other got us a flag but has been [censored]/injured since. 
• thrown defenders forward, particularly McDonald, Petty and Smith, which has sort of worked at times.  McDonald, however, plays well once every four seasons, Petty has been injured and Smith is athletic but limited; 
• bought in another top ruck to try and let Gawn/Grunday play as resting forward, but that hasn't worked; 
• drafted a whole bunch of mid and small forwards who actually have been pretty good (Fritsch, Kozzie, Bedford, ANB, Chandler, Spargo).   

In hindsight I think its easy to say we should have drafted Curnow/Mackay, or bought in McStay, but Weid was a reasonable pick and McStay has been injured a lot and kicked less than 20 goals this season.  

The question for me in that siutation is what is the best, most achieveable way we can improve our forward line next year.   The answer to that may be trying to poach someone, but we need to identify who and how.  More likely, I think the answer will be through the draft, but that could be through drafting a key forward (e.g. Nate Caddy); a small forward (e.g. Watson); a midfielder who can go forwards and kick goals (e.g. Duursma); a genuine mid with good delivery (e.g. McKercher) or a key defender/forward who can either play up front or cover a move of Petty forward (e.g. O'Sullivan).  It might also be time for a coaching/tactics change, but I am not sure whether its our fwds or our mids that are really the problem. 

The reality is that our forward line should be better next year.  I imagine we will move Petty forwards permananently, and so our forward line would be somethign like Roo, Petty, Fritsch, Chandler, Kozzie, ANB.  Talent wise, I don't think that is bad at all, particularly if we draft players who can rotate in/provide better delivery like McKercher, Watson, Duursma, etc.  That may be our best option.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

17 minutes ago, SthSea22 said:

From Draft Guru

4 minutes ago, Willy's Warriors said:

I think its all well and good to say we should poach a forward, but the reality is that there are not many that we could get at this stage: 

• WCE will not trade Allen. He's under contract, young, from Perth and a potential future skipper. 
• Carlton will not trade Mackay, and it sounds like he doesn't want to leave either: https://www.afl.com.au/news/1025140/criticism-contract-and-finals-carlton-blues-gun-harry-mckay-opens-up-about-whirlwind-year.
• GC will not trade Ben King, and even if they were willing to do so, they have no use for high draft picks this year.  given their academy haul
• Max King is contracted to the end of the 2026 season, and St Kilda wouldn't let him go for picks 4 and 5 anyway.

We're also really tight on a salary cap level.  If Grundy leaves, that should free up some money, but not enough for a genuine, top 5-6 in the league key forward.   

If people are floating 800K for Ben Mackay, a genuine key forward is going to be a lot pricier.  We would have to look at a second rung, Chris Dawes, Ben Holland, Cam Pedersen type player, or a risky option, like a player returning from a significant injury, at that price.  I don't know who that would be, but its unlikely that it will be a silver bullet in any case. 

I also don't think this is necessarily poor drafting or trading by melbourne that has got us where we are. We've been looking for a big bodied key tall for a long time, but we've had some bad luck.  We've:

• brought in Jesse Hogan, Sam Weideman, Luke Jackson, Van Rooyen, Matt Jefferson n through the draft.  Two of them left for the west, one is a best 22 player at 20 years old, one is too young to be anything, and one of them didn't cut through as a forward.  
• brought Ben Brown and Josh Schache through trades, one of whom was a hail mary, and the other got us a flag but has been [censored]/injured since. 
• thrown defenders forward, particularly McDonald, Petty and Smith, which has sort of worked at times.  McDonald, however, plays well once every four seasons, Petty has been injured and Smith is athletic but limited; 
• bought in another top ruck to try and let Gawn/Grunday play as resting forward, but that hasn't worked; 
• drafted a whole bunch of mid and small forwards who actually have been pretty good (Fritsch, Kozzie, Bedford, ANB, Chandler, Spargo).   

In hindsight I think its easy to say we should have drafted Curnow/Mackay, or bought in McStay, but Weid was a reasonable pick and McStay has been injured a lot and kicked less than 20 goals this season.  

The question for me in that siutation is what is the best, most achieveable way we can improve our forward line next year.   The answer to that may be trying to poach someone, but we need to identify who and how.  More likely, I think the answer will be through the draft, but that could be through drafting a key forward (e.g. Nate Caddy); a small forward (e.g. Watson); a midfielder who can go forwards and kick goals (e.g. Duursma); a genuine mid with good delivery (e.g. McKercher) or a key defender/forward who can either play up front or cover a move of Petty forward (e.g. O'Sullivan).  It might also be time for a coaching/tactics change, but I am not sure whether its our fwds or our mids that are really the problem. 

The reality is that our forward line should be better next year.  I imagine we will move Petty forwards permananently, and so our forward line would be somethign like Roo, Petty, Fritsch, Chandler, Kozzie, ANB.  Talent wise, I don't think that is bad at all, particularly if we draft players who can rotate in/provide better delivery like McKercher, Watson, Duursma, etc.  That may be our best option.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your thoughts on Tom Fullerton from Brisbane ?

all the talk seems to have shifted to dees getting pick 11 for grundy and...something

i remain confident that further machinations and tim lamb doing his thing will see us finish up with pick 1

27 minutes ago, Viscount Cardwell said:

Your thoughts on Tom Fullerton from Brisbane ?

I like him. Athletic hybrid forward/ruck. Wouldn’t star, but could prove ok depth and there’s a possibility he finds a role as a tall who uses his athleticism to largely do a role and stay out of the way. Price should be negligible. 

1 hour ago, SthSea22 said:

From Draft Guru

This info is wrong.

Sydney 100% have hawks 2nd round pick #22 which hawks used to move up for Weddle. Their own is 30.

Edited September 11, 20231 yr by Nascent

16 minutes ago, Nascent said:

This info is wrong.

Sydney 100% have hawks 2nd round pick #22 which hawks used to move up for Weddle. Their own is 30.

22 is about right for Grundy, be nice if we could swap picks, maybe pick 11 and 22 for Grundy our first and MFC second round pick 36ish

22 minutes ago, Nascent said:

This info is wrong.

Sydney 100% have hawks 2nd round pick #22 which hawks used to move up for Weddle. Their own is 30.

I agree, Zero Hanger update the draft ladder after every match.

AFL Draft Order 2023 - Zero Hanger

I don't think we need a key forward. We need a key defender.

Petty is our key forward from 2024 onwards. Who is helping out May and Lever, or further more who replaces May eventually?

5 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

I don't think we need a key forward. We need a key defender.

Petty is our key forward from 2024 onwards. Who is helping out May and Lever, or further more who replaces May eventually?

Bingo.

We've been unlucky this year with injuries to essentially all of our key forwards (BBB, TMac and Petty).

Petty, with a full preseason training as a forward, and JVR with another year of development, combined with Fritta as the third tall should be more than potent enough to win the flag. Then you have Jefferson developing at Casey and Schache as a break glass in case of emergency option. Go and get a capable back up forward/ruck option (Chol? Fullarton?) and I wouldn't have many concerns about our key forward stocks. 

Steven May has shown signs of decline this year. I'm hearing Thommo will look for another club this offseason. We're going to be heavily reliant on the development of Disco and/or Jed Adams next year. Even if one of those guys develops into a good footballer, we'll still be in the market for a KPD when May retires given we clearly play our best when Lever can play as the third tall. 

tl;dr - Draft Connor O'Sullivan to ensure our current strength remains a strength. 

1 hour ago, Jaded No More said:

I don't think we need a key forward. We need a key defender.

Petty is our key forward from 2024 onwards. Who is helping out May and Lever, or further more who replaces May eventually?

I wouldn't be surprised to see JvR in that role from maybe 2025. He was more impressive there in his junior footy than forward from what I saw. Has fantastic aggression and competiveness. Perhaps @Pennant St Dee could chime in with some thoughts on JvRs prospects as a key defender.

I can see a world where it's Petty and Jefferson forward. Lever, JvR and Turner/Adams back.

Assuming Jefferson kicks-on or another key forward is found to pair with Petty.

Edited September 11, 20231 yr by Nascent

1 hour ago, Jaded No More said:

I don't think we need a key forward. We need a key defender.

Petty is our key forward from 2024 onwards. Who is helping out May and Lever, or further more who replaces May eventually?

Yes. Or at very least a defender that can swing forward.

KPFs are usually a waste of money. Find another key back in the mold of Petty or Tmac who sees the ball well in flight and if they can kick a goal that's a bonus. 

23 minutes ago, Nascent said:

I wouldn't be surprised to see JvR in that role from maybe 2025. He was more impressive there in his junior footy than forward from what I saw. Has fantastic aggression and competiveness. Perhaps @Pennant St Dee could chime in with some thoughts on JvRs prospects as a key defender.

I can see a world where it's Petty and Jefferson forward. Lever, JvR and Turner/Adams back.

Assuming Jefferson kicks-on or another key forward is found to pair with Petty.

I think his best position is as a forward, yes he played CHB at Colts and state level but IMO CHF is where he has the most scope.

We need to understand how much the Melksham and Petty injuries have hurt us. Mcadam obviously being targeted for Melksham’s roll and Petty will be back. We’ve got some defenders coming through and I’d like to see us boost the midfield/rotation stocks in order for Trac to play a lot more time forward 

Watching GWS highlights our need for better ball users between HBF & HFF.If I can be real greedy, I’d like them to be 185cm+ and with some pace.

Sounds like McAdam might be a start, and then at least one more from there.

 

We have targetted an elite mid for several years to either draft or trade:

• Cerra
• Anderson (had we not lost ND2 in the 2019 draft
• Butters
• Holmes
• Humphrey

We have been linked to Reid and Duursma in this draft.

Given his recovery history Gus may not play for part of next season or next year decide he will retire.  His non-availability makes it more likely we will double down on our efforts to get that elite mid.

21 hours ago, Dee tention said:

Grundy to Port for Ollie Lord

Could not agree more. Straight swap, we will be laughing. Offer him Grundys money + some from the hibbo (and hopefully Tmac) retirements. 

On 9/9/2023 at 9:33 PM, Binmans PA said:

We could win by more, I agree that we could do better, but our method still turned the ball over/won the ball back and got two shots within 35m (slight/to no angle) for both Fritta and TMac (arguably our best kicks at goal). Kick them, and we win.

If you do not convert regulation set shots (ie less pressure than shots from open play), you will not win finals. Look at 3 of the 4 finals in week one. The teams that kicked straighter won, and the teams that started well, won.

I'm not denying there's huge scope for improvement with our ball movement, forward craft and forward half play, but despite this, the method still generated more scoring shots that expected score calculated should lead to a comfortable win. That's method succeeding and execution failing.

So it's not on the coaches or even the players behind the ball or through the middle of the ground, it's that those taking shots and missing gettable shots, cost us the game.

The fact that you're zoning in on a couple of missed shots as the reason we lost the game proves to me how little you actually notice outside of one issue we had on the night. 

You're a stat's lover. Go and watch on the couch. You can't hide or give excuse to any of what they showed. Or will you somehow manage to? When you have that many forward half turnovers in a game and that many inside 50's in a game, there is ample opportunity to find an avenue for goal and the evidence has been shown with clip after clip of players who have so many other options. Whether it's a shorter kick, a kick with a lower trajectory, a player open inside 50 who is just ignored.. The list is endless. 

Some of this is absolutely method. Because if it wasn't, we would not be seeing the same kicks going to the same spots consistently. How do you not understand that? 

Why do you and @binmanconsistently ignore these things. 

Petracca literally came out and said the mids need to use that ball better as well. Are you going to argue that? 

It's both instruction and player depending on the scenario/clip you watch. 

Most obviously there are countless entries that will be scrappy due to pressure on the kicker etc etc. But there are so many clips where we have players under little pressure who just refuse to do anything other than 'get it in quick'. 

I could also make a case that we lost the game due to turning the ball over in dangerous positions which gifted Collingwood an easy goal. And if that didn't occur, our set shot inaccuracy wouldn't have mattered.. See how silly it is to rely on one cause?

Go and watch on the couch, look forward to you and @binman writing an essay on how unstoppable we are and how Collingwood's gameplan is flawed and doesn't stand up in finals..

Looking a little bit silly you two!