Grouse

If I spent some time, which I'm not going to, Im pretty sure I could find an article on next year's 'super draft', every year for the last 10 years. Yes, in hindsight there may have been a couple of drafts that produced more elite players than others but to me the term gets used every year. I say get the best picks we can this year. Next year is just that, a whole year away. Draft Players can develope and fall, lists change. Take the best now and worry about next year next year. We always manage to get back in first round no matter what we trade.

My take, is that deals will be done if a player we want is still available. I think we were after phillipou but that seems unlikely now as I don't think we will get into the top 5. We will either trade up our first or second depending what's on offer and who's available. I would be very surprised if we stay with 13 and 37 and take Jefferson with our first.

Just saw Cal Twomey on the AFL site stating that the Dees have offered up both of next year’s first round picks to try and land someone inside the top 6 this year but as of yet there have been no takers. A lot of talk around Phillipou going top 6 now. Do you think it's him the Dees are chasing? Fascinating stuff.

Let's move the backs to the forward line and then when our new backs aren't stopping goals we send fritch jvr and Grundy to the back line. We then play bbb in the ruck because he isn't kicking goals and leave Max forward.

Several clubs very keen on phillipou including bombers at 5. He's the one I'd be after but looks unlikely he will be there at 13.

Every year someone leaves and we get trade options. That's why I'd be moving up in this year's draft buy trading out at least one of next year's firsts. You want new draftees to be playing as long as possible with our current all stars. Next year is an unnecessary year later imo.

Compare his highlights to phillipou. I agree that Jefferson looks a long way off. Phillipou looks much more robust. I'd be trading up to make sure we get him. Contested marking and kicking them from 55.

A game plan thst relies on contested marking forward when we don't have any contested marking forwards. Great. I wonder if he's ever thought of a game plan that relies on quick transition to leading forwards?

Yeah for sure. I hope he makes it. I think he's worth a punt as a cat b because rucks are so hit and miss. But you would have to think it's a long shot given his lack of exposure to the game. A slightly optomistic pragmatist?

So he's 200+cm and hasnt made it as a basketballer but we're hopefull, because if his height, he will make it as a ruck in a sport he hasn't played since under 12s? I don't mind the punt, but he would have to be 1000 to 1 odds that he will make it. Good luck kyah. Take the chance that's come your way.

'Proving far too good for the U18 competition, Mattaes managed to play three reserves games, with his three goal and 13 disposal effort against Sturt in round 17 particularly noteworthy.' He's bottom age and he kicked 3 against grown men. Sounds like he's good to go. And they're saying he has one of the highest upsides in the draft.

I'm about taking needs unless there is a huge discrepancy or slider. At 13 someone like phillipou would fill a need as a developing forward. If he's gone and there is no other forward rucks we rate then sure take a mid. The problem with that is a mid will almost certainly not play senior footy for two years behind out current talkent and we will then be traded if we have a mid glut. Drafting for needs could result in a kid making a much earlier impact. Think bowey, kozzie or even jvr who will probably debut early second year. That being said, most teams seem to take best available talent.

With bakers delisting, doesn't that mean we have another spot to fill?

I agree. I'd be very surprised if pick 37 and a future first doesn't end up being swapped for a first in this year's draft.

Phillipou is from Adelaide, Jefferson Melbourne. I wonder if that will play any part in who we select.

We have the players, we did this year too. For me there are issues around coaching. I'm not saying goodwin isn't the right guy, but it seemed that there was better people around him, better advisers or something. Our game plan didn't adapt this year. We watched other teams adapt and go past us and we just tried to do the same thing better. One example is I don't think we need better forwards, our game plan was not to quickly transition to leading forward but to kick in long and high. That has to change. I think weid will do very well if he is instructed to lead all day and those leads are honoured. None of our forwards are pack markers so why kick to them as if they are. All that said, the coaching and game plan is far easier to change than the players, which we have.

I can already see goodwin explaining that the plan is for may to kick out to gawn on left wing. Gawn kicks high to Grundy on forward flank. Gawn runs down and marks the high kick from grundy in the forward pocket and kicks the goal. I'm absolutely certain it's his 'plan A'.

I think the 'bombing it in to our forward pocket or kicking religiously down the line' to max was when we were playing at our worst. This year I thought we defaulted to those tactics when our mid field was getting beaten and so we would rely on the talls to get it done. Only problem was that they often didn't. Max from the kick out, down the line or in the pocket is no doubt a luxury that often helps us but as a primary go to was, imo, a poor tactic. Our forwards stopped leading, big packs would crunch maxy all day long. Happy to be proven wrong but I certainly wouldn't be drafting to try and make that tactic a mainstay of our game.

We don't need overly tall forwards unless our game plan is to bomb it in. We just don't lead inside the 50 and resort to roosting it into the forward pocket. Instruct our forwards to lead. Our crumbers should be able to lock it in if it's missed from a lead or a big bomb.

So considering pies are asking for a first round pick, we will have to split our Jackson first round pick to get Grundy. I for the life of me can't see any good in going after Grundy. It weakens our draft hand and ties us to an expensive 29yo on a long contract. An utterly bizarre pick up unless goodwin thinks if we continue to bomb down the line to gawn resting forward, it will be more effective that when we did that this year with Jackson rucking. It doesn't work and won't work again.

Why are we only asking for a pick in top 7 and a future first? It better be from a struggling team and not freo. We took him with pick 3. He has to be worth pick 3 just to break even and then another high first for us letting such a talent / premiership player go. Pick 7 and freos future fist, possibly in the high teens is a huge fail imo. Just because freo don't have the ability to get it done we don't let him go cheaply.

This has got 'let's send our best forward fritch to the backline for most of the year' written all over it. How about instead of taking Grundy we chase ahh, I don't know, a forward ? And leave him where he belongs. Owning the backline.

How about this as an excuse. Goodwin says 'he suits our game plan'. But I worry that the aspect of our game plan that goodwin wants to continue is to bomb the ball long to a tall and hope they mark it. It's one of the most frustrating aspects of our game plan imo. Goodwins desire for Grundy shows that he wants to keep doing this into the future. I think we looked most damaging when we weren't bombing it to a tall. Grundy is a massive 'no' from me but it looks like it's going to happen. Prepare for gawn to spend alot of time forward. Big bombs in. Quick ball movement out.

I've been wondering how long the club will wait to rain on someone's literal grand final parade. Any time is too soon for a delisting after a premiership.