ChaserJ

Not one for pick 13, but what are your thoughts on Darcy Jones @Pennant St Dee? I’ve gone back to some of the Champs games and really like his pace and spark. Small, but looks to have some tricks.

Equally intrigued by Gruzewski & Allan @Pennant St Dee.. Shame that both spent a decent time out injured, so we really have only seen slices, but what we’ve seen has been pretty good. Gruzewski looks like a great mark and kicks it well (field kicking when playing back was impressive). Would love to have seen him play more forward than back so we could get a greater sample of him as a forward. His marking is very clean. Those of us outside WA didn’t see much of Allen outside of the final game against SA, but his athletic testing was exceptional. If he’s inherited any of his dad’s footy nous, he could be some player. Seems well suited to the wing, but at his height, could he play a role in the fwd line?

Agree. He definitely has ability, his frame is possibly working against him, but a free hit if it’s as an NGA rookie.

We had a keen interest in medium defenders at the draft last year (ended up with the key fwd in JvR), Stack could fill an absolute need as a speedy defender. Low cost mitigates risk with potentially high return. I hope we’d still back ourselves in to provide a supportive environment (we clearly feel we can in taking on Hunter).

Posted this last week: On 10/7/2022 at 2:20 PM, ChaserJ said: ‘This is very much at the heart of the problem. The AFL have stuffed the equalisation economy with all of the assistance GC received over multiple years (I’ll call it ‘pick-flation’). Theyve had so much draft pick stimulus pumped in, the value of a high pick has just diminished and created a salary cap squeeze in order to retain these highly rated players. Because they’ve taken on too much of that water, so they’re unloading and it’s the well run and well off clubs catching all of the overflow. Even when helping lift the poorer clubs up, the stronger clubs end up benefitting. It’s why equalisation measures are cooked. In order to maintain some integrity of the cap, AFL should have limited the capacity of contractsmoothing for clubs taking on salary dump contracts. E.g. Geelong should take on the full 850 for a two year period, but permitted to negotiate a friendlier extension that only triggers when the original contract has been fulfilled. The measure of when a trade constitutes a ‘dump’ could be measured by the other incentives involved in the trade (I.e. an objectively one sided deal). Funny that Ned Guy is in the role that l’d see assessing this function at the AFL. No wonder dumps were waved through this year. Allowing clubs inheriting the dumped contract and smooth straight away feels like a rort.’ And now this from the Age online last night: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-to-consider-tweaks-for-the-salary-dump-20221013-p5bpmv.html Smarter people than me get paid a lot of money to look after this area, why could this not have been built into the process before approving the one sided salary dump deals? It was completely predictable.

We’d have to trade up to get him I fancy. Ginbey’s gone like a bullet into the top 10. His terrific all round performance at combine has clubs rewatching the tapes as well.

If you look at Sydney, the majority of their backline is made up of players who started in other positions. A lot of their recruiting ethos is around flexibility in position (lots of medium types) and winning your own ball. If you add ball use into the mix, then you can probably slot in almost anywhere.

Well, lettuce is pretty expensive these days, so sounds like great business. #lettuceball

The 30’s are probably the starting point for both. I think Scully’s deficiencies were more exposed the better the competition got. When he was kicking bags, he was much taller than the opposition. He probably lost a bit of confidence as well once he came back to the field. Lemmey’s an interesting one. He looks to have all of the traits, but just couldn’t get it happening consistently. Not sure if it was confidence loss given expectations, or whether he didn’t have that competitive streak, but he had a very patchy year.

To add to @Whispering_Jack‘s earlier post, if we fill some of the glaring list gaps this year, we can approach next year with absolute freedom and flexibility in using those picks on best available players, be it through trade or draft. Jefferson may not excite everyone, but if the list management team believe he can be a good AFL key forward, then take him. It’s one of our bigger list deficiencies in the short-medium term. Given the strike rate of key forwards panning out with high picks, pick 13 is comparatively low risk (refer 2015 draft).

A cost of living tax?

Jefferson a good chance to be there at 13. Harry Barnett is around the mark in the 30’s, although I’ve got some concerns with how we defend the ground ball in d50 and worried that we’re vulnerable against good, speedy small forwards. Wouldn’t mind us grabbing.a good small/medium defender.

I’d be hoping we can get 37 if we throw in 54 with Weid. Pick 37 will go in Davey bid match anyway, but could get as high as 32 or 33 after Brisbane match bids.

Looking at which clubs are doing the picking in the 7-12 range, I think there’s a very good chance Jefferson is there at 13/14. West Coast pick twice and there’s a feeling they’ll go local with Busslinger & Hewitt. Saints probably want McKenzie, Dogs & Blues won’t go tall and top 5 is too high for him. Cats May pounce at 7, but also sounds like they’re into Jhye Clark.

Even further, we may not know the true outcome until the end of next years draft period.

Agree, must do everything we can to build the best possible environment and re-sign Koz to a long term deal. That said, let’s also tap up Zak Butters for a year so we’re ready if Port do come knocking.

If we can get Essendon’s ‘22 3rd pick (rather than future 3rd) for Weid & say pick 54, by the time Brisbane match F/S bids pick 42 will come into late 2nd rd range. That’s probably as good a deal as you’ll get for him, but I’m also comfortable with Sam staying on.

The swap of later picks referred to is till likely us trying to get a future 2nd added to the deal. 2 firsts were always on the table and we aren’t moving Weid just to get a third rounder back from Freo.

Munkara missed a massive amount of the season with injury. In days gone by I might’ve wondered whether Essendon told him to sit out so he gets past pick 40. Lack of exposure should see him get to that range now, but there was a lot of excitement around him coming into the season.

The Vic crop with Reid, Duursma & Archer standing out as bottom agers this year, looks strong. Ashton Moir from SA looks incredibly gifted. Next year isn’t purely speculative, on performance some of those kids would be very high up the order this year if eligible.

This is very much at the heart of the problem. The AFL have stuffed the equalisation economy with all of the assistance GC received over multiple years (I’ll call it ‘pick-flation’). Theyve had so much draft pick stimulus pumped in, the value of a high pick has just diminished and created a salary cap squeeze in order to retain these highly rated players. Because they’ve taken on too much of that water, so they’re unloading and it’s the well run and well off clubs catching all of the overflow. Even when helping lift the poorer clubs up, the stronger clubs end up benefitting. It’s why equalisation measures are cooked. In order to maintain some integrity of the cap, AFL should have limited the capacity of contract smoothing for clubs taking on salary dump contracts. E.g. Geelong should take on the full 850 for a two year period, but permitted to negotiate a friendlier extension that only triggers when the original contract has been fulfilled. The measure of when a trade constitutes a ‘dump’ could be measured by the other incentives involved in the trade (I.e. an objectively one sided deal). Funny that Ned Guy is in the role that l’d see assessing this function at the AFL. No wonder dumps were waved through this year. Allowing clubs inheriting the dumped contract and smooth straight away feels like a rort.

Collingwood would come after pick 19 for Grundy if that happened.

If there’s nothing else of substance given up in that Grundy deal, 16, 27 is a better package for us to add in a bundle in a trade up the order than 13 by itself. If you’re not trading the picks and there’s a range of players that you like in that mid-teen range (Cadman alternatives like Keeler & Gruzewski are around the mark), then I can live with it. The talent drop off from 13-16 looks a lot lower than 7-8. if they are getting 27 as well, then I’m not sure why we’d bother.

At this rate, it’s looking like that. Not sure we can get the deal done. Our forward line would be set for a decade if we could get it done, but our best bet might be him going to GWS and trying to pinch him back in 2 years!

Have seen him play a few times and think he’s shown enough to justify most of the hype. He’s competitive, very good athletically, has great hands overhead and looks to get involved when the game is on the line. Dragged GWV over the line in a few tight ones this year. The AFL website’s On Demand section has all of the seasons NAB League games uploaded, would strongly recommend having a watch of the Rebels v Power game in rd 15 in particular if you want to get a feel for his game. Added bonus of seeing Bailey Humphrey tear it up early (before a head knock finished his day early).