stevethemanjordan

Except for that time he was an AA and kicked 56 goals in a season. Sylvia may have featured in our top 5 in the BnF once in his career if he was lucky? Stringer has runs on the board and is proven quality. Obviously something has gone on this year. I'm not saying we should get him, but he's nothing like Sylvia.

Danger going at pick 10 still makes me slightly ill. And the bloke we picked at number 4 in the same year makes me even more ill.

I think it's really funny how clouded some posters get when it comes to defining "very good footy" and "excellent attributes". It's funny and weird. The expectations for someone like Oscar are so low because of how many mistakes he was making and how infrequently he was having an impact on the ground. But as soon as he stopped making as many mistake and started making a few spoils here and there (without doing anything spectacular whatsoever), posters like you come out and say ridiculous things like that. The same can be said for Watts and how supporters now judge him and the impact he has on games. He gets pats on the back for performing at a level that really, should be expected. But because of his past, the adoration and applause becomes greatly exaggerated. I don't care that you don't agree with my views on Oscar. But please don't say things that aren't true. Things like him having excellent attributes.

Don't give me nightmares.

Oath. I have more concern with those comments when it comes to Oscar over Weed. Weid has obvious talent and easily identifiable attributes that made him standout prior to being drafted. Which is part of why he went inside the top 10. Oscar doesn't seem to have obvious talent nor does he possess easily identifiable attributes.

It's an interesting point. Have you seen him live? I've seen him a few times this year and you're right it is the knock on him. But what makes me rest easier is that his decision making is actually sound as is his spatial awareness. It's only an execution thing and it's usually because he's running so fast. On the flip side, I've seen him use the ball very well and kick some serious goals on the run at times too. I love him. Would love him as a high pressure forward, can take a serious grab too and isn't afraid of the contest.

And so they should. Lever was a pick 14 and I think posters should remember that he slipped in the draft having missed his full last U/18's year of footy. He's now considered the best young defender in the competition. Combine that with the years of development that Adelaide have put in to him and objectively one would agree that the crows actually do deserve more than pick 10 only. I know that if I were a crows supporter I'd be wanting more than pick 10.

An enigma if ever I saw one.

That's okay mate. As soon as you start taking snaps of him over the pre-season and see him in a red and blue training singlet you'll have magically changed your mind.

Yeh have heard some good things too, will be interesting to see where he goes and whether or not his body holds up once on a list.

Not interested in getting into a ping pong game with you but I find it interesting that you of all posters are questioning his year given the way you carry on about the countless players on our list both past and present who either regress or never even get close to reaching the level of footy that Gaff has reached. For all the excuses/variables/other contributing factors etc you come up with for our own players, it would seem only fair that you'd allow the same leniency for Gaff this year. Having said all that, his averages are only marginally less than last year's. See here: http://finalsiren.com/PlayerStats.asp?PlayerID=2079 Last year he wasn't in the top 10 for the AFLCA votes either. I don't know why that's your favourite. I don't really care that he didn't feature in the top 10. The accolades he received from his own club, the panel that choose the AA and the fact he was equal 4th in the Charlie prove that he's quality. Shuey, Priddis and Kennedy all would have had a fair chunk of votes in the AFLCA. It's like saying Selwood underperformed last year because he didn't poll well in the Brownlow. Had Dangerfield not been at Geelong, Selwood would have obviously polled more votes. And as for the other top 5 Brownlow finishers from last year all taking off from where they left off, you're plainly wrong. Parker, Hannebery, Treloar and the Bont have all had down years compared to last. It may come as a surprise to you, but others including myself have an interest in many teams and individuals aside from the MFC which is why we enjoy talking about the possibility of a quality opposition player joining the club. Gaff is quality and is exactly the type of player that we're crying out for. Clearly you've spent too much time at Gosh's paddock to see that.

Oath ^ I'm not sure why some believe that we're out of the race for Lever now that we've re-signed Frost. Here's a quick profile of what key defence depth looks like: West Coast - Mackenzie, McGovern, Schofield and Barrass. This year they went with only three of the four and they had McInnes come in earlier in the year as a swing man whilst they had injuries. McGovern similarly went forward whilst Kennedy was injured. And they have an abundance of tall ruck/forwards who were really effective and helped carry the load. Really, we should be aiming to play Tom and one of Oscar or Frost with Lever as our intercept mark/spoiler ala McGovern for West Coast. Ideally, I'd love a mature-aged big body with an older head who could start ahead of Oscar and Frost also whilst they continue to work on their games at VFL level. Either that or as I said, we could make a radical move and play Hogan at full back. Whichever way it goes, I can't at all see how the signing of Frost will have any bearing on the Lever approach.

He was an AA in 2015. Last year he was in the 44 man AA squad, finished 3rd in West Coast's BnF and came equal 4th in the Brownlow... I'm sorry but you simply can't compare him to Watts given their output to date. Gaff was a former pick 4 and is worth a first-rounder whichever way you look at it based on his individual accolades over the last couple of years as well as his draft number.

That's weird you missed that. You're usually such a considered poster too.... .. ..

So basically exactly what we have in abundance at our club. Trent Mynott, Jack Petruccelle, Alex Federico are all players I'd be interested in around that mark.

Gaff was a pick 4 so they'd want a first rounder minimum which is fair. I'd offer our 2018 first-rounder and Kent for their 2018 second-round pick.

May I ask, do you have a connection? Or are you simply repeating what Jane has posted? If the latter, @jane02 can you confirm?

Definitely achievable to land both Gaff and Lever and that would be a fantastic trade period. Two ready-made quality players that fill the two positions currently being held by underachievers. (Tyson and underdeveloped key backs). Both players are previous high draft picks and are serious quality with Lever being the same age as our core group of young talent which is really important. (Trac, Viney, Brayshaw, Hunt, Weed, Hoges, Oliver and Salem). So in that regard, I'm not really bothered about first round picks from this year and next year going out. It's more important for us to fill our side with ready made talent now as well as continue to add players in the 21-24 year old age bracket so that they all come through together. That's what will see us stay competitive for longer as a club and give us the best chance at a flag. I also believe the down hill skier comments are probably a bit misunderstood. West Coast have been perennial strugglers inside the contest for a while due to having so many outside runners. Gaff would benefit hugely from playing in a midfield group that excels at the contest. And on the G, his ability to run both ways can't be underestimated. One of the best gut runners in the league. Whilst his disposal isn't what I'd term damaging, he uses the ball really smartly by both hand and foot. Super smart player.

I'd be happy to keep him. My frustration comes from the position he is being played in. I'd love an explanation. I think he needs to be inside mid rotation only or depth. He adds nothing to the side playing anywhere else.

Unfortunately I didn't get the chance to see the Stingrays this year sorry Chaser.

Always a good thing to keep depth players. Hopefully he'll be working on his 'skills' at Casey next year and can provide solid backup when needed.

^ Tried to edit an old post and that happened. Demonland is broken. No delete option and no ability to edit an old post, as bad as Oscar if you ask me... Jks, relax.

Ummm. What? I'm so confused by this post. For his last two games, Dom went at something like 57% disposal efficiency. Most of his possessions are uncontested and with a mix of kicks and handballs. Anything below 60% for his numbers and split between kicks and handballs is truly awful. Truly, awful. Suggesting that 5 turnovers from 30 kicks wouldn't be a big deal is completely ridiculous because he has not and will not average anything like that in his career let alone reach it once.. What a strange example.

Haha. I honestly don't know what you were watching, because it can't have been the game. They didn't get on top in the middle until late in the first quarter thanks to the momentum they had built through kicking goals early due to our errors, lack of two-way running and therefore our accountability. There was nothing wrong with our work in the middle for the majority of the first quarter. We broke even. The difference was our awful decision making and inability to hit the right kicks. Tyson was an enormous liability in that first quarter. Have a look at his first handful of disposals. They were mostly shocking. Phillips (direct opponent) kicked the first goal of the game against Dom and he was caught out because of his lack of pace many times on the wing in the first quarter.