Demons1858

Note that each club has a different number of players on their lists which makes looking at raw numbers a little misleading i.e. Esse has 42 vs GC with 49. I have transformed the numbers into proportions which while still not perfect helps with comparisons. Age, games played and capability are important factors in determining the potential of a playing list now and into the future. Age profile (driving strength & maturity): If you have a list with a higher proportion of players 27+ years of age you want to be challenging for a flag before you tip over the edge and need to bottom out to get youth in. Geel, WC, North, Coll, Rich, Port, Hawt, and GC lead in that order. For North and GC, this is a concerning given they aren't playing finals and certainly not challenging for a flag. Perhaps this is part of the reason North were happy to get multiple 2020 draft picks in from Melb in exchange for their round 1 2019 pick The Saints, Melb, Bris, and Carlton lead in the combined 18-25 year range in that order. Being in this range should suggest you are an up and coming team assuming recruiting, coaching and development are aligned. It seems that teams in this space can have a breakout year that defies their profile but doesn't happen consistently until the list ages e.g. Melb prelim, Bris prelim, perhaps Bulldogs flag Games profile (driving experience & know how): The age of your list will often drive the number of games your list plays. Players like Mitch Brown who are older but have played fewer games are pretty rare and seem to be rookies/depth players. Although despite having the 2nd lowest group 26 years or under we have the 7th highest games played in the combined 51 games or more group. Having not had much success and many quality senior players to hold our youth back in the past may be a positive in the future Draft profile (driving talent & capability): While age and games have an important role in list profiles, having high end draft selection to get A and B graders coming through the door is also critical. Picks 1 to 7 tend to play a significantly greater number of games than those from 8-20 which plateau, with further drops after that. Which is why teams looking to reshape their lists tend to push some of their quality older players out the door to get quality picks for a rebuild. It would have been good chart the proportions of players to be selected in different draft rounds across clubs but I don't have the data (i.e. round 1, 2, 3 rookie etc) but suffice to say we have had a healthy number of high end draft picks Overall: Experience which belies your age is the ideal mix when complemented with high end drafting. So while we have a relatively youthful list which often means you are only capable of a breakout year, hopefully our relatively high experience and talent will lead to sustained success before our time is due. Fluctuations (particularly for emerging teams) can also be driven by fixtures (based on the ladder position of the prior year) and injury levels (less depth)

I had a chat to Luke Jackson today while on a break from work in front of AFL house and he is a friendly, easy going, and level headed kid. Was more than happy to chat and spoke genuinely about the opportunities at MFC and is smart enough to know he is a good fit for what our team need and is super excited by it including working with Max. Was going to chat more until a friendly 3AW dude jumped in (who was equally as excited for MFC as he was also an MFC supporter) asked him a few more questions. He has also spent a fair bit of time in Melbourne through rep sides for basketball and footy so aren't concerned by the go home factor with him at all ...

Agree. Happened with other picks on the night also

demonlanders can rightly look at positives to come out of the mid season review with lots of what looks like positive changes: Richo, Burgess, Langdon, players genuinely coming back in good nick is the biggest one for me. likewise our most recent recollections are of a poor 2019 season where bad luck through injury was exaserbated by poor performances by coaches, fitness staff, and players so l think its ok to be positive or negative in posts. perhaps we just need to play the ball a little more in debate and avoid subtle and not so subtle jabs at each other in the process. l don't like posts defending the club and players blindly (eg l trust the club are making the right decisions or coming across as a spokesperson for the club) but also don't like overly personal attacks on players (eg omac) and the club when we know they are trying their best but out of form, returning from injury or trying their best to reach afl standard which few of us do

one thing l am pretty sure of is that by trading with Freo who now have picks 7 and 8 we would have ensured they won't get in the way of the player/s we are eyeing off at pick 10.

Agree, interesting that Craig Jennings was our game strategist last season and he has been moved on ...

Probably a similar number to those that played against Geelong and Hawthorn

I'm a fan of Josh and posted on here that we would struggle to make finals this year due to injuries before round 1, but even so, l felt he overplayed the injury card in his speech tonight. Surely we weren't bottom 2 material even with injury which were exacerbated by poor player management. Players carried leg injuries throughout 2018 and should have been allowed to recover so they were back for finals and 2019. And shoulder injuries don't stop you running. Would have been nice if they acknowledged some errors they made, but apparently we were just unlucky with injury and they did everything right but there was nothing that could be done.

People quickly forget he was more than handy in 2018 when fit. Our line coaches need an upgrade me thinks

I have but don't recall it getting into the specifics what they are doing other than its very different to past seasons

This chart shows the drop in games better. Player quality flat lines around pick 8 to 20. So there may be some merit in the argument that we trade pick 8 out for 2 picks between say 10 and 20. The argument against this would be that by all reports this draft pool is deeper so pick 8 may be better than the historical average

I have seen it mentioned by the player a few times now that the running program over the break and also the sessions they have planned as part of preseason training are a lot different to those under Misson. I'm intrigued to understand what the differences are in terms of volume and exercise type. Anyone have some insights on this?

Nasher, the reason you get such variability is because its such a small sample size. If you drew a linear line to best fit the graph it would show a downward trend. The quality of picks after 7 drops significantly. l would also treat pick 13 is an outlier and ignore it. To increase the sample size you could bundle picks 1 to 3, 4 to 7 and 7 plus. A chart with those 3 data points would show the decline in games by picks alot more clearly

Looks like they're in good nick, although I would swear that salem and petracca a sucking in their guts just a little

Hey Binman, your response to was to Deespencer's post that made reference to the doggies premiership in the context of not resting players due to injuries. So its fair to assume if you agree with that statement then that is how you also feel. Will take it that that's not actually what you meant though ... sorry for any confusion

If Burgess tells us around 17 players needed post season ops / rehab after 2018, I'm pretty sure at least half of them would have been carrying those injuries from early in the season and didn't just get injured at seasons end. That being the case mfc had the option to treat players (with ops and longer rehabs) earlier in the season and have them back in time for finals and the next season. Below are some examples of players that re-injured and should have been given proper rehab and ops earlier in the season so they were back in time for finals and 2019 (and these are just the ones I can recall): * McDonalds injuries started in the 2018 preseason and then again in May 2018 * Viney's troublesome foot flared on multiple occasions * Hannan had persistent knee injuries throughout 2018 * Melksham carried an ankle injury through out 2018 and had repeat hamstring injuries * Hunt twice injured his ancle in june and again in august 2018 These players all had leg injuries. Players can carry shoulder injuries and still do the running to get themselves up for the following season, but its leg injuries that cost you the following year and we should have better at managing them early in the 2018 season so they were back for finals and 2019.

Not sure how we can be compared to Rich and the Doggies. Neither of those teams carried injured players through their season. In fact the bulldogs in particular relied on feverish team/system pressure with young players coming in for 1st games playing on enthusiasm and knowing their roles.

True to some degree that they were pushing for finals but we clearly risked too much and mismanaged things. We absolutely got ahead of themselves. It will also cost us big bucks in 2020 memberships as failed season hit finances harder in subsequent years. Going forward, where possible players should be operated on earlier in the season so they can be back in time fit for finals footy and the following season

Good to have them on board again. In this case, I think the fact they are a year to year proposition reflects their own financial position and is a little less about mfc. Also, with the fixture now out and an extra MCG game, its easier for the club and sponsor to quantify the exposure the mfc can offer their brand and how much that should cost. All supporters (even if you aren't looking at buying now) should click on the links as these stats are used to assess marketing performance!

Found myself not wanting the interview to end ... really interesting fitness perspectives about mfc last year and also afl vs epl. On reflection: * Expectations of most supporters, media and betting agencies for a top 4 or top 6 finish this season were ridiculous given the number of ops to our best players although 17th place surprised all of us * Makes you wonder why we carried so many injured players through to the end of the 2018 season. Smarter player management would dictate that we stagger ops strategically throughout the season to ensure that we don't have so many missing at once and hopes for the following season aren't completely lost * EPL players train much more often than AFL players even though they play less minutes * Mental health is so important these days. Perhaps this is part of the reason why caring coaches are doing well at the moment

Not going to need that pick as we will exchange 3 and / or 8 into multiple picks

l think this will get done. Both parties have gone public about the potential partnership which suggests they have an in principle agreement and he just needs to pass the medical. Its classic Mahoney media management

l think Harley saw the same gold coast sports science specialist that said that the root of KK's concussion issues had been newly identified during trade talk. Atleast KK didnt have any behavioral issues. Not interested, will just be a distraction

it was reported that the mfc would only consider him if he had some interest and he doesn't so we move on and use the cap space next year.. Carlton and his mgmt were are all over him going to psd well before trade deadline ended and he will get to Carlton. Move on everyone and focus any truely 'available' players

l think we will end up splitting pick 3 by the time national draft night arrives. So that would take us to 38. We rerookie the existing 4 A`s as none stand out to me as likely to be targeted by other clubs. The remaining 2 or more spots comes from a combination of psd draft pick/s (probably one of newnes/martin) and potentially more A rookie/s. Do we have any Casey vfl players in contention this year?