grazman

There are a number of unknown factors in all this such as whether we have to use a first round pick this year -I think based on the rules we do - I guess this isn't an unknown for the club or the AFL, but I'm still unsure. Then there is what if any priority pick GC get and finally whether we think we a) need King or b) He is worth giving up pick 2/3 for. I think high on GC drafting strategy this year is to try to keep top end talent tied to the club by drafting Rowell and Anderson together. I think GC may have known it would be hard to keep King when they drafted him, but if he wanted to go home they'd be able to break even - a better risk than drafting a lesser player. If GC aren't given a pick at the pointy end then our hand is significantly strengthened if we are interested in getting King. But what we are giving up is Anderson for King and we would still need another of GC later first round draft picks to come back - so expect a player/s (ANB/Stretch) or later/future picks to be involved.

Has he? I know there was a twitter link earlier in the year saying he was close, but since then I haven't heard whether he's actually signed.

It was reported earlier in the year from a poster in the know that he needed surgery on both hips at the end of the season. I suspect this may not have helped him with his form over the year.

Well he would be because he's a Free Agent.

England rolled for 85 before lunch by Ireland.

Ireland have the poms 6 down before the first drinks break at Lords in their test match. Perhaps a very good omen for the ashes! Edit... Make that 7 wickets... go bite a pillow you pommy Bast*rds!

Well first and foremost we have to get him to nominate us as his preferred destination. If we are not it really doesn't matter what our trade currency is. To do that there are at least three factors to consider that are extremely variable depending on the player you are dealing with - also discounting a fourth factor in opportunity as Hill's an established player. The first is remuneration - and this incorporates the length of the contract (see Judd and Shiel as examples it's not always about what is in the TPP). The second factor is the prospect of success - most players don't switch to clubs destined for the bottom half. The third is personal connections - sometimes players are comfortable switching to clubs where they know no one, but for others the opposite is true. This factor isn't a primary motivation, but it can influence the decision-making process if they are deciding on where to go based on who they know. It's why Hawthorn remain firmly in the frame for Hill because of his previous relationship with Clarkson. The side benefit of that maybe that Isaac Smith may look for a better contract elsewhere. I assume the Saints are in the frame because they are prepared to offer money over and above what other competitors are.

Langdon finished fourth in their B&F last year and will probably finish top five this year. I would think our second round pick is about right... and given the report by Jon Ralph you would assume an in-principle deal with them may already have been reached... not that that sort of thing goes on in the AFL.

The first thing to understand is that the players now have the whip hand when it comes to deals. If Brad Hill would rather go to the Hawks or Saints (as speculated in the media) then it doesn't matter what we would give up because it just won't happen. I've seen nothing to suggest we're even in the frame for him in terms of destination - other than we might be interested.

He's contracted. His brother will be coming out of contract and will be a free agent, but he is more often injured than not lately.

Tom Papley has a year to run on his contract, but there is media speculation he maybe coming back to Victoria. Articles mention the Blues, but I think Horse and Tom would be looking at the best possible deal.

What a cracking match, the standard of fielding (and catching in particular) was excellent. I Really feel for the Kiwi's today. Three crucial moments. The first was Guptil referring his LBW, I get that he didn't want to be out, but Ross Taylor would surely have reviewed his LBW (and survived) if Guptil hadn't burnt that decision. The next was when Boult caught Stokes on the boundary, but didn't instinctively throw the ball back. If he'd done this - they win. The last was the boundary off Stokes bat as he dives for the line. That's just terrible luck and absolutely nothing you can do about it. I'm still at odds with how I feel about the technology and referrals. How accurate is Hawkey, does anyone know? (particularly when it comes to spinners) The referrals were brought in to eliminate the obvious howlers, yet players will let the match situation or their egos decide when to review... the game is definitely not the same. Anyway bring on the Ashes.

I think according to the AFL rules we need to use a first round pick this year, so l think we would have to secure another first round pick before we could do that deal.

Alex Keath and Bryce Gibbs package deal for a future second round pick?

A question for those that actually watch U18 footy (not just regurgitate what they read on other sites) - Is Cooper Stephens a reasonable option for our first pick? I know he has slipped a little in thinking because he's out injured ATM, but it seems he has the attributes to still be a potential top 10 draftee.

Gus didn't participate this year because of a back injury though...

Following the seniors game plan then.

There were rumours last trade period. There's a lot of pressure on Hinkley and Port this year, another poor year and ...

I was at the game in Sydney, so I had a front row seat, so to speak, about why. He certainly has assets: tall, athletic and quick..., but he torches the ball. In years gone past I remember when opposition sides were happy to sit off certain players to allow high possession numbers in the back half because they'd always turn it back over. He's in the same boat. I actually wanted him to get the ball because he would either a) dispose of it poorly leading to a turn over, b) sell a team mate into trouble leading to a turnover or c) would take off like a headless chook without considering who to give it to next. I'm not sure what his DE% is, but i'd be surprised if it was higher than about 34%. Also for a bloke his size I actually reckon (like a lot of defenders now) he has very little idea about when to mark and when to spoil.

For the first time in a long time I look at the lineup and think that's probably how they'll start on Saturday night. I've got no doubt that I'm wrong.

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics. Good sides defy history and predictions. We will put up a better showing down at the cattery. I'm not losing any sleep about going 0-2

Thanks A F, I think that is what Hinkley was probably referring to then. Clearly this wasn't helped on the weekend with so many players underdone and out of gas towards the end of the game.

I think if you had to pick out one metric to measure forward pressure then turnovers would be probably it (though - again no single metric is likely to give you a complete answer). Genuine question - do you know how we fared with Forward 50 turnovers last year?

Maybe, is tackling inside the forward 50 was the only measure of defensive effort (it is certainly one indicator of work rate)?

May will definitely come in probably at the expense of Frost or Hore. I think it's extremely unlikely KK will come in after a significant injury and only one run in the reserves. It's hard to see too many other changes being made unless they decide to bring in Preuss or Keilty to give Max a chop out as he looked well below his best yesterday. It may be an option with the smaller/narrower ground at Geelong.