grazman

Interesting comments about Casey. Even far removed up here in Canberra I had serious concerns at the start of last year in regards to certain comments as to the relationship with the Casey coaching staff and the development of MFC listed players. Seems like they may have found a better way forward with the MFC picking up the tab for Casey's coaching and (I'm guessing as a result) Melbourne gaining greater autonomy over the direction and development of MFC listed players. In the end for the relationship to work for the MFC we have to be the senior partner, (sorry but the notion that its an equal relationship is simply a furphy) but we must also understand our responsibilities and give due respect to the benefits that Casey brings to the partnership.

Sorry, I haven't got enough time atm to read the whole thread, but thought I'd add my 2cents worth (sorry if its been mentioned already). Why the draft age should be raised. Because there is more certainty and less risk with draft picks (most players then become more a known quantity - with maybe the exception of a few KPP) Why it won't be raised. The AFL believe it would allow the most promising junior talent to be poached by other sports because they won't wait around a couple more years when they can earn big dollars earlier. (not saying I believe that btw, but I think its a real concern for the administrators of our game).

Yeah, Nah. What I've seen in the games that he's played hasn't made me believe that it's a lack of fitness that he can't get enough of the ball - he's good enough to get drafted, but not to stay on a list.

A perceptual illusion - It must exist because there's a word for it. But it's about imagining what will be rather than the current reality and the fault is often with the expectations that are built up in the absence of hard evidence (by the recruiters rather than the recruit). If we were to increase the draft age to 20 we could relegate potential to a subordinate category rather than the primacy that it currently occupies.

While new draftees get a minimum of 2 years I wouldn't be surprised if the club tried to get picks 2 & 3 to commit beyond that.

I think the big plus for Lever is the big knock on Wright - appetite for the contest. If Wright doesn't like the physical aspects of the game playing against boys then that's a serious concern. Its all speculative at this stage given we're primarily relying on the opinions of others, but the best comparison is Watts, what he does is very special what he doesn't do is beyond frustrating. If Lever has the same work ethic and competitiveness of a Nathan Jones (going by reports) then that's a very big tick along with his other attributes (strong in the air, awareness in traffic, neat skills, height etc). NB. Not saying either is like Watts or Jones, just using current players as a point of comparison.

Lever is apparently 192-194. Played mainly as a key back, but been training as a midfielder. Goddard is 191 and Goodes 194. This is the type of swingman we need, able to run off halfback or hold down a KPP, run through the middle all at various stages of the game. (incredibly hard to match up on) I'm not as worried about X factor, we just need hungry competitive footballers who can stick at a task. His knee is a worry, but so is diabetes.

We're in furious agreement - a pick in the low teens was tongue in cheek - it's more likely to be a top ten pick even with FA compensation to other clubs unless something really does click, but the point still stands we need to trade in a low pick which means giving something up. Accepting that you may have to give up a good player and your first rounder to get a player who isn't available as a free agent who would you take out of Treloar, Shiel and Kennedy? (My order of preference mainly due to age). Daisycutter, Personally I don't think Tex is overrated. Off a knee reconstruction his stats are more than favourable in comparison to Hawkins for example: Walker: 15 games averaged 14.7 possessions (6.8 contested), 5.6 marks, 2.3 goals (34 total) Hawkins: 23 games averaged 12.1 possessions (6.5 contested) 6.4 marks, 2.7 goals (63 total) I think he's a better match for our game plan being a very mobile forward and more value for money. I also think in terms of gettable targets he's the one I'd be working on more than Dangerfield (though one doesn't preclude the other) - we've probably been putting some work into him and his manager. I doubt Hawkins will leave Geelong. The time to start working on trading is now - put the effort into managers by talking dollars and years and hope that the right combination of circumstances will prevail to facilitate the movement. A lot will depend on Phil Walsh and how Adelaide perform of course, the same with Leon Cameron. The pressure will definitely be on in the first half of the year. Its a funny sort of game now - a bit like RL when players are playing out a season knowing they're going to be playing for someone else the following year.

Only problem is he's not a free agent and I don't think a pick in the low teens will be enough to satisfy the Swans. Otherwise I agree we should have a crack at whoever we can get.

Tex Walker as a Free Agent and one of Treloar/Shiel (doubt we could come up with the combination of picks/players to satisfy for both) would make me very happy.

Agree completely Ol 55. Only time will tell whethet we paid unders or overs. Too many armchair generals prepared to throw the towel in because clearly the people running the show have no fortitude or brains. Oh the irony. We traded in identified list weaknesses with the exception of dragging in an elite midfielder. My relatively uniformed view is because we rated 2&3 higher than what others were prepared to pay.

I'm not sure it's a lock that the Saints take McCartin. They're working to a long term plan. They'll get Membrey to replace Stanley (apples for apples). I can't see how their hand is forced so they 'have' to take McCartin, particularly if they rate Petracca above him. Talls are risky. Petracca looks a safer bet.

X man Dan Hannebery. Not sur about the other references other than he visited Knox Grammar.

Grimes a first rounder too.

Respectively the club handled both of those very poorly and I feel it did enormous damage to morale and the fabric of the club at the time. I feel for Jack, but the situation is a little different for two reasons. 1. Both Woey and Junior had been and were fantastic players for the club with runs on the board. Jack through no fault of his own has not (so far). 2. Paul Roos publicly, and perhaps even more emphatically to the players themselves, emphasised that our list is not good enough and changes need to be made - whereas Woey was completely blindsided by his trade and Junior's 'retirement' ballsed up completely, I am assuming Jack and perhaps others know exactly what the situation is with their currency and the direction of the club. They may not like it, but I'd like to think this is not a surprise for Jack to read it in the paper (particularly as suggested in one of the articles he's already toured the punt rd facilities) Players like Simon Godfrey (a popular whipping post in his day) got the most out of their abilities, but they had limitations, and because of those limitations they end up being traded or delisted and we don't tend to mention loyalty in the same breath. If players want out because they don't like the coach or are chasing coin like Beams - well that's modern footy isn't it. We're in the market for good players. I don't know about their respective personalities, but Beams is better than Jack and as much as it pains me to say it, considering his history (and in the recruiting team I have to place my trust) a top 12 pick is worth more than Jack too.

Seems like the only progress being made on trades involves us (at least according to reporting). Very much in keeping with Roos' management during his time at Sydney. I remember thinking back then they got their deals done quickly. Didn't really understand why they targeted the players they did or why they paid what I thought were 'overs' at the time (now I think I do). If we give up a second round pick for Frost (which has only been suggested in the media and might be well wide of the mark) there's a reason. Where a player gets drafted is not an indication of their worth (eg Tom Rockcliff) It's what clubs are prepared to give up to get the players they require. We now have a coach and FD with a trading plan (glory hallelujah!). My gut feel is we'll keep pick 2 for Brayshaw and will wait to trade 3 (either on its own or downgrade) for a mid next week when clubs start getting serious (and some might start panicking). I imagine the strategy is to go to bring in guys like Harry, Frost, Garlett (all role players) plus at least one maybe two mids (Is Lyons still on our radar?) as well as Brayshaw, Stretch and 1 other (maybe 2) in the draft as well as some rookies. That would be 8 perhaps 9 list changes. That seems about right.

Just lost for words. So saddened by this news. He and Sean Wight were my two of my heroes.

If GWS want Patracca then they'd want pick 1. Pelchen loves the draft (and justifiably so in his case). Picks 2&3 for pick 1 and a later pick (for Frost) and no Saints bid on Billy, may very well appeal to him. These picks would be ontraded for Shiel and Frost.

We will have to wait and see if Roos actually has any interest in getting Mitchell. I also struggle to understand how he can be worth a top 5 pick. Hard for a club to argue that sort of value for someone not in their best 22.

Tecnically its true that they can't tag and flood in TAC footy, but some coaches don't always abide by the spirit of the agreement. Truth is as others have pointed out that there's not much scope for overly negative tactics at that level. That said its probably why the benefit of later\rookie draft picks are crucial to finding guys that won't necessarily win a brownlow but play a role.

I was hoping with a tall forward line we could have exposed them a little more than we did, but all credit to their key backs who defended very well. Pedo lstarted really well and looked ready for a day out but we just couldn't get a mark inside 50 when it mattered. Interestingly it was Russian who was subbed out. I think Max is definately improving, but it will be interesting to see whether they go with the two ruckmen again for next week.

Roos & Co have been very astute recruiters over the journey. They don't get sucked in by whose on offer by other clubs. They target needs and particularly players that tend to be under the radar, but who have shown all the required attributes. As BB mentioned most clubs over value first round draft picks so I think we might well trade in another Tyson type scenario. I'm not quite sure it will be for any of the names mentioned so far though.

Keep in mind a lot of our frees were for illegal holding off the ball. Glad the umpires picked this up its getting to be a joke in the game.

You mean like draft tampering... not sure if you're comment was tongue in cheek or not DD, but I at least am still a little raw about such suggestions whether offered in humour or not because our amateurish efforts (you can add incompetent, laughable, or downright embarrassing as well) of trying to short cut the system have come back to torment the club and us supporters. Reading the Hun piece on Freeman today makes him sound like a logical fit, and he may certainly be our desired player, he may also well be available at pick 9, but if he's snapped up before then I doubt it's the end of the football club as we know it or our fortunes, just like picking him at 9 may also not be the magic bullet either (staggering I know). The trade down from 2 (where we had much more certainty) to 9 must have been done in the knowledge that Freeman along with 2 or 3 others were hard to split and that while he maybe ahead, I doubt that Taylor and Viney will upend any tables on draft day and throw their bums in the corner if he's already been taken. Roos has consistently talked about club culture about building to competitive efforts. In his model no single player is a key to a premiership. The Swans one two with lists that many just didn't rate as having enough talent. Hawthorn while disappointed to lose Buddy, still would have won last years premiership without him. If Freeman is available he'll be a very good selection if not it will be someone else the club thought would be thereabouts. There's no certainties with 18 year olds, hence Roos reluctance to bet the farm on them.

You eould think so. Has the speed to compliment viney and tyson and is also a firtce competitor in a similat vein.