Axis of Bob

Depends who's saying it.

It's a big call but I too would like us to have the best key forward of the last 25 years.

After everything you have said over the years, I can’t believe that we finally discovered a point at which you feel shame.

It very difficult to describe a draft in a single word because it's made up of a number of people, each of whom has different attributes and are rated differently by different clubs. I think you'll get a pretty good idea from looking at how easy/hard it is for clubs to trade into certain areas of the draft, in terms of how many picks change hands and how much you need to spend to get in there. For example, last year you saw teams fighting to get Gold Coast's pick 11 (we ended up paying 14, 27 and 35) whilst Adelaide got pick 14 for only pick 23 and 26. That's because, as Taylor said afterwards, there was a big drop off in quality after the first 12 players in the draft, in the eyes of most clubs. In 2019 a lot of clubs were willing to move draft picks around in that late 1st round-early 2nd round range, which probably indicates that there was still a bit of quality around and teams were searching for specific players they were interested in for a pretty even draft (after the first 2 or 3). There were some really excellent players in that lot but some proper misses as well. Do you measure the strength of a draft on the quality of pick 1, 5, 10, 20, 30, 70?

It’s still early and I’m by no means any expert, but I currently lean towards Lalor. I think he’s the type of player we’ve shown ourselves to go after aggressively when we’ve had a chance.

I suppose my basis for saying it is that we made similar types of offer in the past for specific players that we really like. We offered multiple first round picks to move up the draft for Harley Reid and also for Bailey Humphrey, who are both strong, powerful inside mid/forward types.

I think so. I reckon that pick 25 seems about right to me (I'll wait for the clubs work out what the details of it are) and in line with what most of these types of deals usually get done for. I also think that a pick in the 30s is probably about right for McAdam, albeit probably before he had the down year that he had this year. We got lucky with Freo having a down year last year that allowed us to get Windsor (who last year traded Schulz for pick 34 and the premier's future 1st - which became pick 10), so it's all swings and roundabouts IMHO.

Then we shouldn't have played so badly this year. If we were top 4 again, as we hoped to be, then it'd pick 35.

We are unlikely to get many opportunities to bring in a young player who can be the centrepiece of our future midfield. We have long term talls at each end but we've seen the weakness in our midfield once Clarry and Trac were out of the picture. I would be shocked if we didn't use our early pick to pick up a contested, centre square midfielder to be able to build around. To this end I think we'll keep 5 and, if anything, we're more likely to trade up than trade down.

The thing that should translate across to AFL well is his clearance work. He’s very similar to Gus Brayshaw in the way he moves through a stoppage.

I doubt that Nibbler was only set on going to Adelaide. He has a huge amount of goodwill at the club to send him to SA and is not doing his negotiations through the media. If an announcement has been made it's likely to either be because a) Port aren't interested in him/can't bring him in (salary/picks etc), or b) Melbourne and Adelaide have already reached an understanding of what a deal looks like. I suspect the latter.

I’m with you. I think Lalor could be the best in the draft, from what I’ve also seen. There are so many parts of his game that should translate across at a high level. If we had to trade up for Lalor I would do it without hesitation.

Definitely, although this is not necessarily an unusual thing for monster mids. I'm also not convinced he's a natural inside midfielder in the contest at the moment, as he is quite poor at winning the ball in stoppages unless the ball is hit straight at him and he monsters his opponent. I also don't think he has great composure in the contest either. But he's a 6'4-6'5 monster, with a unique trait that will definitely translate across to AFL level and good coaching could have him develop into a very good player. I just have concerns int he back of my head that he's actually not as good a footballer as people think. But I'm just a YouTube judge, so I am likely wrong with some or all of this.

I’d be interested. If the club is looking to have McVee and Rivers play more midfield and to play a more dynamic style then we need more distributors from half back. We only have Salem and Bowey now as distributors, so Daniel is a proven player down there that fills that need well. The Bulldogs have many players of that role, do his opportunities have been more limited. Daniel is a good player and suits our team. I’d be keen to get him.

This is just plain inaccurate. We didn’t want to give up Bedford and were very disappointed that he chose to leave. We had contract for him but he got a bigger one at GWS.

Great size, absolutely ragdolls opponents in juniors which will still happen a bit at the next level at his size. My questions are around whether he has the work rate and natural inside midfield ability to go with his size. There’s absolutely no reason to have any doubts on the ability of someone like him to be a great AFL inside midfielder, yet somehow I still have some. Has some unique attributes but is definitely not a finished product.

I see Langford as being much more ‘in the eye of the beholder’ than most, so this makes sense. Some will see the things he does really well and others will see some holes. It’ll be interesting to see where he goes on the day.

He’s a very JT style of player and I suspect we’d pick him if available, however I’m dubious that he’ll be available at pick 5 TBH.

I guess Tom Stewart is going to need a new lawyer then!!

Drink!

If ANB wants to go home then we should shake his hand and wish him well. He’s earned the right to be sent off with a minimum of fuss and our best wishes.

It’s the players that nominate for either a 6 month or 18 month contract as part of entering the mid-season draft, not the clubs. The length of Kentfield’s contract is irrelevant to the club’s thoughts because Kentfield nominated for the draft with a 6 month contract. Source: https://play.afl/sites/default/files/2024-05/2024-MSRD-Information_FAQs.pdf

Kentfield is a ‘big boy’ forward who does his best work when he can physically dominate opponents. These types of players usually take a lot of time because, no matter how big you are at 18, you can’t play like that against mature players until your body matures as well. It’s different for a key forward like Cadman etc who can rely on athleticism to get separation from his opponent. He’s much more akin, in style, to Tom Hawkins where he’ll likely have a long term strength advantage over opponents but it will take time until that eventuates. Until then you’re likely to get good effort, small glimpses and inconsistency based on his match up. This is what we saw with Hawkins, who was a dominant junior and much more developed at the same age. Most of these types of players will require more development to be AFL players than athletic key forwards like, say, Jamarra or Cadman. Judging this type of player based on two months is silly.

It's a tough game to play into the wind when you're down 23-5 in clearances. We've lost the top end of our AFL midfield, so we see that lack of depth for inside midfielders the most at VFL level, particularly when you're up against genuine quality like Sanders and Macrae.

I wasn't talking about the teaser! 😁