Axis of Bob

Thorp re-signed, Dowler is still in contract.

The Hawthorn midfield v Bulldogs midfield from last night: Sewell - 180 Bateman - 174 Young - 189 Hodge - 184 Lewis - 186 Mitchell - 179 Crawford - 174 Cooney - 186 Cross - 187 Ray - 187 Boyd - 184 Eagleton - 180 Griffen - 188 Higgins - 184 In summary, the average height of Hawthorn's midfield is 180.9cm, while the Bulldogs' is 185.1cm

I said no such thing. I merely asked why a 6'4 player is better than a 6 footer. McVeigh isn't half the player Goodes is, which is the main reason why Goodes is more valuable. They're also completely different types of player. The point is that you cannot make the statement because the players are not going to be exactly equal, especially since Watts and Rich are very different players and play different positions.

You just repeated the previous comment in a different way. How are they of more value?

Why?

Beat me to it, Rhino.

The point is that if one of these players does a knee and retires from football due to an injury sustained in the game (despite being delisted anyway) then we will have to pay them half a year’s worth of their current contract, even if we have absolutely no intention of renewing it. Especially with Weetra, who we have already delisted, and Zomer, who one can only imagine will be delisted, there is absolutely nothing to gain from playing them.

So you're recruiting him as a midfielder? Riiiight.

Why would we want yet another CHB, Freak?

This information can be read many ways. However, as I was doing it, it occurred to me that it wasn't so much the type of player that Richmond and Hawthorn targetted, but more to the point it was how often they succeeded. The infamous Buddy/Tambling draft does not show as much about the type of player that was drafted, but the fact that Franklin is a star and Tambling is a struggler. Nobody asks why Richmond chose Deledio over Roughead, because Deledio is a better player despite people using the same argument about Buddy and Tambling. Another thing is that Hawthorn have a far, far, far superior group of older players than Richmond (ie, those that were already there before 2003). Bateman, Crawford, Hodge, Mitchell, Ladson and Osborne are the foundation of a very good midfield, with Hodge and Mitchell both stars and Crawford a Brownlow medallist. They had no talls that weren't very, very flawed or too old, so they traded them out and picked up new ones. Richmond had Richo, Bowden and Johnson, plus a bunch of honest battlers. They had very little talent and next to nothing to trade out for picks. You can see this by the fact that they had 7 picks over pick 70 in 2003. But the other thing is that they kept missing with their early picks. Picks like Tambling (4), Meyer (12), Pattison (16), Oakley-Nicholls (7) have hurt them, because they are in the age group where they should be starting to be really good players. So I would conclude that Hawthorn started with a much better list, then made fewer mistakes with early picks so they now have a better list. Richmond were stuffed, then made stuff ups and are only now starting to rise the ladder. I don't think that it necessarily makes a big difference what type of player you pick up, as long as they become a good player. Look at Geelong's first round draft picks since 2000: Bartel (8), Mackie (7), Tenace (7), Varcoe (15), Selwood (7) and Taylor (17). There's nothing overly special about these players, but they haven't really missed too often. Taylor is the only tall, and the best two of those players (Bartel and Selwood) are just averagely paced, clean and efficient midfielders. Nothing amazing. Funnily enough, the two that have struggled the most (Tenace and Varcoe) and the ones that are a bit flashy and pacy. What I think this shows us is that you don't need to take a risk with early picks, you just need to get it right. It doesn't matter what type of player you pick up, as long as they become good players. That's why my leaning is towards Rich, because there is very little doubt that he will be a really good player. I don't want to risk not getting a really good player (Rich) because we want to take a risk that a different type of player could might also be really good. It's too important to stuff up.

Richmond last 5 years draft history (ie, since 2003) 2003 N. Brown (Trade - pick 6) A. Gilmour - pick 21 - Traded Holland T. Roach - 37 (f/s) D. Jackson - 53 B. Hartigan - 70 S. Tuck - 73 A. Raines - 76 S. Fletcher - 79 K. Archibald - 81 B. Marsh - PSD L. Weller - PSD 2004 T. Simmonds - A. Fiora Deledio - 1 Tambling - 4 Meyer - 12 - Ottens Pattison - 16 - Ottens D. Polo - 20 L. McGuane - 36 D. Limbach - 52 M. Graham - 65 T. Knobel - PSD 2005 P. Bowden (Trade - 56) J. Oakley-Nicholls - 7 C. Hughes - 24 T. Casserly - 40 2006 G. Polak (Traded + 8 for 13) J. Riewoldt - 13 S. Edwards - 26 D. Connors - 56 C. Peterson - 60 A. Collins - 73 K. Kingsley - PSD 2007 M. Morton (Trade - 35) J. McMahon (Trade - 19) T. Cotchin - 2 A. Rance - 18 D. Putt - 51 D. Gourdis - PSD Hawthorn last 5 years draft history (ie, since 2003) 2003 D. Jacobs (Trade - pick 6 ie, Rawlings and Veale) T. Croad (Trade - pick 10) H. Miller - 25 Z. Dawson - 41 M. Ball - pick 51 - Traded Harford and Johnson D. Scott- PSD 2004 Roughead - 2 Franklin - 5 Lewis - 7 + B. Nixon - 37 + 10 - Thompson T. Murphy - 21 M. Little - 26 - Thompson S. Taylor - 53 2005 X. Ellis - 3 B. Dowler - 6 G. Birchall - 14 - Hay + Lonie M. Bailey - 18 - Hay + Lonie B. Muston - 22 2006 M. Thorp - 6 B. Renouf - 24 J. Morton - 33 - Everitt J. Kennedy - 40 (fs) G. Moss - 56 J. Thurgood - PSD 2007 C. Rioli - 12 B. Whitecross - 29 S. Dew - 45 Players on list before these drafts: Richmond - J. Bowden M. Coughlan C. Hyde K. Johnson C. Newman K. Pettifer M. Richardson J. Schulz G. Tivendale Hawthorn - C. Bateman T. Boyle C. Brown R. Campbell T. Clarke S. Crawford L. Hodge R. Ladson S. Mitchell M. Osborne M. Williams

I might challenge this concept, but I'll do a bit of research and get back to you.

Simple. If you have pick 1 in the PSD then you approach an out of contract player, offer them a juicy deal and they decide to come across. You tell their previous club that you have the PSD but will offer them something in return as a show of goodwill etc and then pick up Warnock for pick 35, which is well under his value. Then you approach uncontracted player number 2, offer him a juicy deal and he comes across to your side. You tell their previous club that you have the PSD but will offer them something in return as a show of goodwill etc and then pick up say David Mundy for and pick 51, which is well under his value. Then you approach uncontracted player number 3, offer him a juicy deal and he comes across to your side. You tell their previous club that you have the PSD [pcik and intend to use it. So you pick up Joel Corey for free in the PSD. Now you have, for example, Warnock, Mundy and Chapman for PSD pick 1, ND pick 35 and 51. Now do you see how you use the PSD? Macho bravado gets you nowhere - you need to be smart and keep your head.

There are more star midfielders in the game than there are star key forwards. But there is strong evidence that you need more than one star midfielder in your side whereas there is no proof that you need any star key forwards at all. The question is: Are our resources better placed in a midfielder than they are in a key forward?

Remember Clarkson's first few years? Remember how everyone ridiculed him for playing a foreign style that they players couldn't yet play? Look what happens now when the players do it properly.

I'll just be the first of many to (again) tell you that you are wrong. If you can't tell that Palmer's disposal is dodgy then there's no point arguing with you as you simply refuse to see it. As for his game, Palmer is a good young player. He's a hard runner and I admire that. However he does so with a man's body already (he's heavier than Morton despite being 5 inches shorter) and he also torches the footy, especially by foot. This is near Palmer's peak, whilst Morton hasn't even got to base camp.

Does he?

Out of interest, what is the specific reason why most people would prefer Watts over Rich (or Naitanui)? Is it because they perceive him as the best player available?

Ha! KC. I bet he'd be rapt! So when a group of people watch Casey play with him, do they become the Sunshine Band? We could be like that fool that follows the Geelong VFL team and yell "that's the way, uh-ha uh-ha, I like it!" Anyway thank you so very much for your contributions Baz. Always good to get the ear of stalwarts like yourself and you do bring a great deal of joy to to those at the game and also those at Demonland who can't get to the games.

I would assume that this meant that Spencer moved out of his host family's house recently and into a place by himself or with some friends.

Melbourne Team Backs: M.Whelan, S.Martin, C.Garland Half backs: J.McDonald, M.Warnock, P.Wheatley Centreline: S.Buckley, C.Bruce, M.Bate Half forwards: B.Green, C.Sylvia, A.Wonaeamirri Forwards: J.White, B.Miller, M.Newton Followers: M.Jamar, C.Morton, N.Jones Interchange: D.Bell, A.Yze, C.Bartram, L.Dunn Emergencies: J.Frawley, S.Valenti, A.Maric Team Changes In: Jeff White, Adem Yze, Lynden Dunn, Colin Garland Out: Paul Johnson (Hip), Addam Maric (Omitted), Shane Valenti (Omitted), James Frawley (Omitted)

Ahh, so you're one of those people. That's OK, as I have noted your name down in my head for future use when deciding whether to value your opinions. Cheers. The fact that we are paying nearly 100% of the cap says that we pay our players too highly and that we should be looking to drive a harder deal. Green is probably used to him, and his team mates, getting more for their equivalent performance. Unfortunately for Greeny, Bailey wants us to get better. Greeny may accept, but I'll hardly lose sleep if he leaves.

Wanock can flat out play. That's not the issue. I'm actually enjoying this whole episode because Melbourne haven't lost any reputation, perhaps even gained a little bit, and Mark Harvey is consistently shooting himself in the foot, along with the Fremantle Football Club. Bailey just plays a straight bat very professionally and Harvey unleashes with all the media savvy of Arthur Tunstall! Fun to watch.

Harvey really is a halfwit, isn't he. He's trying to sell the Freo situation to Warnock and he comes up with this: "He probably understands he's still evolving as a player and he's probably going to play with a guy (Sandilands) that hopefully asserts himself into a dominant ruckman for a period of time. "And Robbie can play along with that for many years to come and that's the striking thing that he should be looking forward to at this stage." So Warnock "should be looking forward to" being the second string ruckman and playing limited minutes behind Sandilands "for a period of time", eh Harvs? I don't know if the idea of being second string ruckman for the next 8 years is really what Robbie wants to do. It certainly isn't going to be the driving force behind keeping him in WA. If that's the ace up his sleeve then I hope he's already holding 4 Jacks.

How was he treated badly? He wasn't very good and so we delisted him. Did he want a gold watch? Armstrong was OK on the weekend, but I don't think he any certainty to stay on West Coast's list next year. Actually, I'd say the odds are against him.