deanox

I reckon if a club signed with Docklands stadium when it opened, then they should only be able to move back to the MCG when an existing MCG tenant moves out creating a vacancy!

Tholstrup pretty chuffed to be above Petracca in the list of significant injuries.

Is there any evidence he is upset about the role or is it just an easy line for media to make up? The evidence I have is that he spent most of the first quarter on the bench last week, came on and finished strongly and left the ground arm in arm with Goodwin didn't he? He looks happier to me than he has for a long time. I know that's an average way to judge these things, and sure he might be traded, but it currently seems pretty baseless. Just media stoking fire for clicks.

Ok so he is lacking acceleration and power, he can't break away from congestion and there has been a drop off in explosiveness based on your post. I agree. We are also seeing him at record low time on ground. Posters are reporting they think he looks a bit bigger this year. Some suggestions are he is carrying a few extra kgs of weight. Whether overweight or a bit heavier due to gym, it's an observation. Since the middle of last year he has not had continuity of football or training. An extended stretch in hospital, injuries, limited pre season, more injuries, etc. Yeah, he is having an poor year by his standards. We all agree on that. Yeah he is having a middling year by AFL standards. He is probably still around abouts the top 75 players in the comp as per rankings etc. (424 play each week so that's top 18%). And yeah, that's not going to be enough to win a flag, you need top 10 and top 20 players to do that. Maybe, just maybe, all of the decrease in physical attributes you are describing are a result of that lack of preseason?

I don't think I'm cherry picking stats. Those stats are Clarry's bread and butter in good years too, and he is still at the top of the club for them. He absolutely hasn't been at his best, I acknowledged that. My point is he hasn't been the complete disaster some people are making out. Someone claimed he didn't tackle, yet the stats show he is leading us for tackles. It's true he isn't influencing games as he did previous years, this is reflected in the coaches votes. Instead of comparing to other MFC players, we could compare his league wide: 34th for disposals 17th for contested possessions 9th for ground ball gets 42th for total clearances 41th for tackles Not terrible by any stretch, he is still giving top line AFL numbers. But he isn't top 10 like he has been, maybe only top 50. He is ranked 35 in the the AFL ranking points, 74 in total fantasy points etc.

Just to flag,Clarry is currently: - 4th at the club for tackles (total and average per game) - Leading the club for disposals (both) - 7th for total effective kicks (the top 5 are all defenders who always take safe options so lead this stat, 6th is Langdon) - Leading the club for total contested possessions (2nd behind Gawn in average) - Leading the club for total possessions. - 2nd for turnovers (unsurprising because of how many posessions he's had, but he is second behind Viney here). - Streets ahead in first for ground ball gets. - 2nd for centre clearances, 3rd for stoppage clearances. - 4th for pressure acts. And he's done that while averaging 77.7% tog which is 18th at the club (Ben Brown the only non regular above him) Yeah he's having a down year by his standards, but a) he isn't on his own here and b) he is still performing statistically as well as anyone else in the midfield.

When Melksham did his knee last year I'm sure they just listed him as season, not indefinite. I'm not saying that I think indefinite means he can come back this year. I think it just means, we aren't putting any timeframe on it.

My take is that the competition is broken, not just Casey. The best players not on AFL lists aren't playing at VFL, they are playing suburban league where there is a match every week, they get paid, and their teams care about winning a flag. The VFL level comp doesn't have the elite fitness to execute AFL standard game plans and pressure.

I think I heard Goody say Woeys corky wouldn't be risked on the long flight to Perth but they were hoping he'd get up for a game in the VFL. Makes sense.

I reckon if a coach is below Neeld on the records list we should probably forget about them!

For anyone interested here are the stats of all coaches to coach 100 or more games, as well as all premiership coaches.

In a few weeks Bevo will have coached more games and to more grand finals than any other WB coach ever. Maybe some think his record may not make him an all time VFL/AFL legend, but he is about 39th on the all time games coaches list, and about 9 of those haven't won a flag. So he is in good company. Goodwin has a long way to go to get past Norm Smith or Checker Hughes*, but he is a comfortable 3rd at the moment for us. His record is fantastic, and if our kids keep travelling the way they are, he'll be around many more years.

I reckon with the modern game and zones, the 15 m or 25 m penalties will be more of a punishment. They stop the game and allow the opposition to set up and give you no territory bonus. I think if you wanted to make this better you could do something like setting some distances or locations where the penalty advances the player too. - When paid anywhere in D50 allows advancing to a location on the D50 line of the players choosing (so can move to CHB from the pocket). - When paid outside the D50 but in the back half, the player advances to a point in line with the centre circle (in a direct line between the penalty location and the goals). - Anything forward of centre advances to the F50 (in a direct line between the penalty and the goals). - Inside F50 advances to the goal line. It takes the measurement out of the umpires decision (which has proven difficult). The anomaly would be if the penalty occured close the one of those lines. You could set a "minimum penalty" of say 10 m or 15 m, and if the penalty will be shorter than that you advance to the next line.

We did it before the Carlton game too I recall, bucket of soap water during the early warm up. In the presser Goody said improving our wet weather game had been a big focus, I think he said we'd lost 9 of our last 10 in wet weather. So it's good they are aware and working on it.

I'm pretty sure we traded our future second and kept Sydney's.

@binman and @Binmans PAmy observations on Sat night were that we started with the -1 at the stoppage set up we've used previously and tried to play a loose defender. That shifted to even numbers in our defence, I assume they sent one forward to man Lever up and even up at the stoppage. Essendon then adjusted to their own loose man in defence, and we used a +1 at the stoppage, but it was often sitting half a kick off the stoppage. At one point, Essendon managed to create a +1 in their forward line for quite a while (ie not just a single play) and during that patch we had the extra at the stoppage. I think they scored a goal once when it got out the back from a centre stoppage and they had an extra number forward. It was a little odd that we left it for so long to be honest. It was hard to tell what was happening, because of the way it seemed to constantly shift, but that was what I managed to piece together. I could be totally wrong, it's hard to tell especially in a congested game.

Grundy - paid pick 27 Grundy - received future 2nd and pick 46 Hunter - future 3rd round (around pick 50) Schache - future 4th round pick Fullarton - pick 47 Billings - future 3rd round pick McAdam - future 2nd round pick The Grundy trade has basically broken even. Sure it has tipped slightly their way with their good year, but no major damage. All of the other trades except for McAdam have been for a bag of chips. And they are bags of chips we probably wouldn't have used at the draft anyway. Given the cost was so low, the trades were probably worth the gamble, with high upside if any of those players turned it around at Melbourne at virtually no cost. McAdam hasn't performed yet and we dropped down the ladder, so that trade looks like it might be a bust (although make a prelim and the cost decreases significantly). But McAdam has found some form at VFL level and it's possible that the injuries and lack of preseason are the major factor, meaning he has a role to play over the next 3 years. Jury is out. All in all I think this list of players is "low cost gambles from a team with little capital to spend". If one of Fullerton or Schache played 50 games we'd be laughing.

Yes. It is a selection from the players who weren't good enough to get drafted last year, including the rookie draft). It is basically a delayed rookie selection after you see a bit of exposed form and development as an under 19.

I think both are good measures to look at in tandem, neither tells you everything. Median helps remove the effect of outliers (like a Brent Harvey or Goldstein), and is also likely to be more consistent week to week. So if you want to know "half the players are less than a certain age" then median is the stat. Average puts more emphasis on those outliers, and tells you about that top end (given the bottom end is limited by draft age). For example, two squads could have the same median age, but one might have a higher average age because it has a group of seasoned 250+ game players all over 30, whereas the other list has a lot of players in the 26-29 bracket. Edit: a distribution graph is probably better. You want to keep the mode (or age with the most players) lowish so you don't risk falling off a cliff, but not too young that you're too inexperienced.

@jnrmacand @whatwhat say what Footywire.com has average age and experience stats for each team for each match played (under the heading stats). I've found I need to use desktop mode to see them on my mobile. A quick look indicates we are equal 7th youngest team in the comp this week, with the dogs, both at 25 years and 4 months. Below us is: Freo 25 years 2 months GWS 25 years 1 month Hawthorn 25 years North Melbourne 24 years 8 months Adelaide 24 years 7 months Gold Coast 23 years 3 months About 6 teams were above 26 years on average I think.

@kozzyisalegend Kentfield was overlooked by every club in last year's national draft and rookie draft, as well as any opportunities for supplementary signings (ie if we wanted to push to replace Brayshaw). He was then taken as pick 11 in the mid season rookie draft. So think of Kentfield as a player that we drafted as a rookie at the end of last season. First we have low expectations that he will make it. His selection is as a project player that we hope might develop. Most players drafted as rookies never play an AFL game. Secondly, if he does make it, we expect he'll take a couple of years to develop to the point where he might push for an AFL game. Tall players take longer to develop. And he is as much a project tall as you'll ever get.

Yeah bizarre article for me. 11 of those were in our 23 this week. That's a super young team. JVR, Kozzie, Windsor, and Rivers are all regular top performers and could be in that "star" category. Turner has unlimited potential as a young KPP at either end of the ground. Judd McVee, Bowey, and Sparrow, have all shown they are consistent AFL level players. That's a core of 8. Kolt has shown he can perform at AFL level but is a year or two away from breakout. Jefferson looks super promising at VFL level. Thats 10 who are likely to have a good run at AFL level over the coming years. For a club in the finals race, I'm pretty happy with our youth.

Just a note that AMW lined up on Waterman, and Darling a few times today, particularly in the last quarter. I didn't see him lose a contest to either but doesn't mean he would have coped one out. This was when we only had 2 of May, Lever and TMac on field, but WCE had Waterman, Darling and Allen forward.

His body work at stoppages is worth looking at too. Happy to take contact and pressure and open up channels. He gets in their way, and it is really annoying for opposition. I reckon he's going to be good.

We wanted him to stay but he didn't.