1 hour ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

Agree. Picks 30, 45, 56, 58 & 73 might also equal pick 1, but are nothing like it in reality, unless you are holding them for a FS / academy that would actually be bid on at pick.

Hmm, I guess if you had unlimited list spots then 5 picks spread out might be worth more.

And if it were the 90s when junior recruitment wasn't so professional, even very early picks were hit and miss, and there weren't academy programs skimming off a bunch of speculative kids, then that would boost the relative value of later selections. Just ask Geelong, and even Melbourne, in 1999.

For what it's worth, very late picks aren't worth anything in the points system. Only 30 and 45 would have points value out of that hypothetical set, and they'd be worth pick 24.

To get points value to pick 1 from five later picks you'd need them to be roughly picks 20-24.

And that actually confirms your point. Probably the best and only good result for that in the last decade would be Max Holmes and Jake Bowey vs Jamarra Ugle-Hagan.

Pick 6 and 7, well, we can still realistically hope for a Naughton, Serong, Butters, Pickett, Will Day, or Nasiah WM. At that point in the draft, such players are still pretty regular.

Umm, so if West Coast(?) agree to swap #1 for picks 7 and 8 could we still laugh at PG's comment? I get it: if there's no takers, short of overspending , 7&8 wont become 1 (or vice versa) But the point still stands that getting 2 likely high-class youngsters at once can change everything - we got quite a bit for someone who no longer was part of the team, possibly was causing problems and may be a shadow of his former self (taking a big chunk out of the salary cap).

On 18/10/2025 at 13:01, Dee Dee said:

A quiet tip (but keep it to yourself)!

If you want to read articles that appear in the HUN and don’t want to purchase the rag get an app called PressReader. Link it to your local library* and bingo lots and lots of publications at your fingertips (not just local and international newspapers but magazines as well from all over the world)!

*If your local library isn’t signed up to PressReader then tell them to or, join a library that is!

This is how journalism was ruined. People stealing stuff.

Now we complain about lack of competition, lack of depth and anything else you can think of, like 'The Age is now the Harvey Norman Tribune'.

Be careful what you wish for.

10 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Hmm, I guess if you had unlimited list spots then 5 picks spread out might be worth more.

And if it were the 90s when junior recruitment wasn't so professional, even very early picks were hit and miss, and there weren't academy programs skimming off a bunch of speculative kids, then that would boost the relative value of later selections. Just ask Geelong, and even Melbourne, in 1999.

For what it's worth, very late picks aren't worth anything in the points system. Only 30 and 45 would have points value out of that hypothetical set, and they'd be worth pick 24.

To get points value to pick 1 from five later picks you'd need them to be roughly picks 20-24.

And that actually confirms your point. Probably the best and only good result for that in the last decade would be Max Holmes and Jake Bowey vs Jamarra Ugle-Hagan.

Pick 6 and 7, well, we can still realistically hope for a Naughton, Serong, Butters, Pickett, Will Day, or Nasiah WM. At that point in the draft, such players are still pretty regular.

Of course clubs want higher and better picks. But obviously it's never as easy as calling a team with #1, 12 and 18 in a good draft position and a team with 7, 8, 13 and 14 any lesser blessed. While a team may get a Chris Judd the first pick can problematic as both McCartin and UgleHagan have shown recently. It's nice for a club to have the option of a potential future legend of the game over two future multiple All-Australians. But however we probably did well with the Tracc trade (and if the "small change" isn't ridiculous ( in the 70s or whatever) then, well, we may as well as be arguing whether 0.9999999 is 1 in future similar trades for a gun)

On 18/10/2025 at 11:41, dpositive said:

So I think Max looks at the squad and sees 2 significant players gone. He lived with Clarry so is very close to his concerns. He has literally and figuratively fed him and understands what is required. He must believe that he can be replaced within the squad by others lifting, and maybe more aware than others of how change needs to be affected. Petracca was also certainly a significant part of the premiership group but as stated the 2025 Patracca is not the 21 Petracca. Again I believe he changed but sees his role as a job, he may not be the game breaking Norm Smith big time player that a premier team needs. Again Max would be closer to him than most, and closer to the squad to understand who might step up to replace him in a new structure and game plan. Im happy to go with Max.

It is a massive test of King, and the club but I think the truths of the public statements are certainly good. We all move on GO DEES

It's funny how ones opinion can change in a few days. I went into this trade period feeling very deflated at the prospect of loosing Oliver and Trac. We got imo a good deal for Trac. It says a lot to me that we gave Oliver away in fact we are actually paying part of his salary to be free of him. Our trades in the form of Steele, Mio suggested improvement. The Hawk hmm wait and see! Overall I feel we have improved our team how they play with a new coach etc. will be revealed in March. Someone said we had Oliver and Trac the last two seasons and finished 14th both seasons and they didn't win games or awards for us. With the draft still to come there is plenty to be enjoyed till March. Go Dees!

4 hours ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

Strap ourselves in, then! '26, '27 and '28 gonna be fuuuuun!!

Yes, otherwise we might be doubly disillusioned

8 minutes ago, pitmaster said:

This is how journalism was ruined. People stealing stuff.

Now we complain about lack of competition, lack of depth and anything else you can think of, like 'The Age is now the Harvey Norman Tribune'.

Be careful what you wish for.

So what do we do? So i should pay for books, papers, music, film etc the way i did in the 90s. That would have me paying way more and wondering why Im skint while everyone else goes the cheap route and the people creating the above stuff get an extra cup of coffee out of my generosity. Too bad if I was a travel agent or anyone else who now earns a lot less (or nothing) thanks to modern-day progress. There was something like the Law Of The Commons. If , say, a large community are overfishing their nearby lake and in time all the fish are gone everyone loses out but at the same time no one feels at fault because with thousands of fishermen every individual is less than 1% responsible. I dont know the answer vut this is where we're at.

On 18/10/2025 at 09:16, Adam The God said:

Fascinating.

The most interesting detail is this for me:

"The soft cap for Goody was taken care of in this year,” confirms Guerra.

“That’s been sorted. So we have got a clear (2026) cap."

I'd still like to know if the AFL offsets Goody's Sydney salary against the soft cap for the Dees. Obviously he should get all his money that we owe him but it would be sensible that if he's getting say 200k from Sydney that we don't have to count 200k of the payout in the cap.

Aside from that it kind of hints towards us not paying the full cap in 2025 given we didn't have a high priced fitness guy like Burgo, only had Chappy as an in demand assistant and don't seem to have a big recruiting or footy admin team.

Certainly good news that we're clear to give King a crack on an even playing field.

As a side note, journalism was ruined because improvements in 'productivity' technology, as basic as microsoft word and a google search, made it possible for total non-experts to churn out $1 dross that resembled $10 real journalism enough to flood the market.

Its a cycle that sits somewhere between the pottery wheel, which crashed the market for prestige ceramics for a millenia, and AI which is currently crashing the market for undergradauate essays, sincerity in communication, and [censored].

If you dig around you can find great sources of football news and views and inside knowledge, not least of them Demonland of course. The only thing holding it back at the moment is the power of the AFL HQ and 'Broadcast rights' holders. If the material was more open sourced, just imagine the kind of content which could be produced by the current enthusiastic and informed amateurs, if they could go full time!

In the end, it is the monopoly on access and footage shared by an old clique which is the ENTIRE problem, and every time we undermine their business model we are doing football, journalism, and football, a favour.

Funni story and nothing to do with this thread or any other for that matter but I was at my local shops (qld) and I was walking back to my car and this guy who just parked his car and was getting out his pram, was looking at me and I was thinking I am going to get mugged here anyway I get in my car put the window down as I leave and he yells out “GO DEES”.

So naturally I stopped and he said I saw ur tattoo and number plate to which I replied yeah we are all a little crazy in the head. Then his wife came around the corner from the car and said sorry about that ha ha.

Just goes to show us dees supporters all over the place.

This isn’t the first time this has happened to me either. It’s great to see.

Edited 11 hours ago11 hr by DemonOX

3 hours ago, pitmaster said:

This is how journalism was ruined. People stealing stuff.

Now we complain about lack of competition, lack of depth and anything else you can think of, like 'The Age is now the Harvey Norman Tribune'.

Be careful what you wish for.

PressReader is available to members of public libraries, academic institutions and to many private institutions as well (solicitors, engineering firms and the like). Your local municipal library pays to host the service for you to use. And the publications on offer through that service give their consent.

3 hours ago, pitmaster said:

This is how journalism was ruined. People stealing stuff.

Now we complain about lack of competition, lack of depth and anything else you can think of, like 'The Age is now the Harvey Norman Tribune'.

Be careful what you wish for.

I pay a substantial sub for an on-line version of a newspaper that I trust to have fewer axes to grind than the Herald Sun. On the rare occasions I want to read something in the Herald (always MFC footy articles pointed to from here) I have absolutely no scruples about stealing it. I'm not ever going to be tempted to ever take out a sub. So Mr Murdoch loses nothing when I get to read the words of wisdom from his footy journos. (That's the only downside.)

And as DeeDee says if a library puts a paper on pressreader, they do that with permsission and may pay untold amounts of $ for the priviledge. Journalism has more problems that this.

Lived thos article, Guerra is the right man for the job.

Put the right spin on it, was classy and respectful to our outgoing champs. But also with a sly enough dig at them as well.

No [censored] or completely unbelievable statements and explains other areas with a clear though process and rational plans.

Hopefully he pulls the board into line, as he seems like a straight down the line, tell it how he wants it to happen kinda guy! No more leaks!!!