Sydney_Demon

The AFL has just agreed North's Special Assistance Package: https://www.afl.com.au/news/1041604/afl-commission-signs-off-on-north-melbourne-assistance-package A good outcome I think in general for Melbourne as there had been talk of North getting an extra pick after Pick 10 (following the picks of all 2023 non-finalists), being gifted Ryley Sanders or being able to access Sanders inside the Top 40 using picks as with Gold Coast's Northern Academy players. What's the view of Demonlanders of the finally agreed Special Aceptance Package?

This is one of by bugbears. It seems that the only way you don't get a blocking free against you in these situations is by getting out of the way and letting your opponent go up in the ruck by themselves. It seems now the umpires are under instructions not to recall the bounce unless one side has been severely disadvantaged which is a totally arbitrary call. The answer is obvious. Get rid of the bounce and then at least umpires will be picked on their umpiring ability, not their ability to bounce the ball.

I hope you're right. I might be being slightly unfair but playing him in our 2 finals this year contributed to us losing both. It's easy to say in hindslight but in my opinion it would have been better if he hadn't recovered enough fitness to be selected (even with Melksham & Petty injured I would have brought in Shache ahead of him, at least Schache has a degree of agility). I really can't see any upside for TMac. He's taking up a list spot currently but he is contracted for next year so is entitled to remain on the list if we can't negotiate him off it.

Yes, we get the 6th free pick of open players but all the listings I've seen so far include all the players, not just the players available to clubs that don't have father/son or academy selections available to them. That makes sense because you don't know exactly when those father/sons & academy players etc. are going to be taken or even if. e.g. if some club selected Ethan Read at 4 GC probably wouldn't match it so then he becomes an 'open' player. Much easier to understand if you leave all the players in the pool & slide back the picks. If you look at historical drafts that's the way it works. e.g. Matt Jefferson went at 15 last year which was Melbourne's first pick, not Pick 13, if you don't count Brisbane's 2 father/sons. In evaluating the value of Fremantle's Draft swap in 2022 I can guarantee Melbourne wouldn't have said it doesn't matter about Brisbane's picks, they would have said they had access to the 15th best player, not the 13th.

No, what happens say if North puts a bid in at No. 2 for Jed Walter and GC match it Jed Walters goes at 2 and every pick after that gets pushed back. So, right now it's: West Coast 1, North 2, Hawthorn 3, GC 4, Melbourne 5. If North get a compensation pick for Ben McKay it will be: West Coast 1, North 2 & 3, Hawthorn 4, GC 5, Melbourne 6. After Jed Walter goes to GC: West Coast 1, GC 2, North 3 & 4, Hawthorn 5, Whoever trades for GC's Pick 6, Melbourne 7. The players don't slide anywhere. Yes, you're right. If Ethan Read goes a little earlier, then all the players expected to go above him slide back one position. That's a totally separate issue.

Not sure how you have Melbourne at 5. We will be 7 as North will get Pick 3 as compensation for Ben McKay (a total joke) and Jed Walters being taken by Gold Coast at 2 pushes all the picks back 1 position. I hope this is what happens. Riley Beveridge should know since he works for the AFL and you'd think would only be releasing this is he had the sign-off from above.

Sorry, this is a recent development I'm not across. Can you provide some info. I had heard they'd missed out on being gifted Ryley Sanders or even having access to him under the old Academy rules. What is the latest on what they're likely to get as special compensation for their long-standing incompetency? It's of course a total joke that they wil get Pick 3 for Ben McKay who basically might be worth Pick 15 being generous.

I like this suggestion, and Melbourne did win the AFLW last year and are a dominant team this year. But with the current Melbourne AFLW list, any coach with even limited ability would be expected to produce these results. In short, I don't know enough about his abilities/talents to know whether they are trabsferrable to the AFL arena. I know its too soon to bring any rationality to the anaysis of the last 2 years but to put it simply we crashed out of the 2022 finals due to having a crocked-up team that couldn't play the finals out (in both cases we should still have won given our dominance in the first halves). In 2023 we should have won both games and failed to take our chances. Look at who we were missing in our forward line this year at season end. Basically it's not game plan. it's injuries, luck & poor execution at crucial times. I don't really care whether the media turned against him this year. The media between them contribute little and most of them are there because they are ex-players who lack the ability to be current coaches and are happy to ride on the coat tails of their playing careers and take the easy money.

Well, the issue is that picks 5, 10, 13 will likely be 7, 13, 18.... because at this stage North will get Pick 3 as compensation for a Ben McKay move to Essendon plus a likely Pick 11 as AFL Special Assistance, and Gold Coast will take 3 Northern Academy picks (Jed Walter at 2, Ethan Read at 9, Jake Rogers at 12; according to Cal Twomey's latest rankings). 13 could even become 19 if Jordan Croft decides to nominate as a Father/Son and is taken by the Bulldogs at Pick 11 (Cal Twomey). That's the reason why Clubs are probably prepared to pay at what would appear at face value to be over the odds for Pick 4 becaise Pick 4 will only slide back to a minimal extent (likely Pick 6), whereas Pick 10 upwards and especially Pick 13 upwards will be pushed back a lot further. That and the fact that the AFL points allocations for various picks should tail off a lot quicker than it currently does. So say looking at the Bulldogs, pre-draft the points trade situation will be 11 & 19 & 2024 First Rounder for 5. For Gold Coast they will get full points value for 11 & 19 (enhanced by the 20% discount) as they will use them on higher Academy picks. But from a WB perspective they'll be looking at what they'll be worth if they retain them (13 & 23) and what players are likely to be available at those levels. Similarly, looking at WB's 2024 First Rounder. What's that likely to be worth? No doubt WB will be thinking they'll finish higher than GC will be thinking, but in any case say we assess that as worth pick 13 (WB finish 6th in 2024). 13 wlll probably actually end up at 17 or something siimilar so nothing particularly exciting from either a GC or WB perspective.

I appreciate it's only at VFL level but Chol kicked 5.4 yesterday in the Prelim against Box Hill. 16 disposals, 11 marks, 2 tackles.

An interesting approach you've taken. Players don't change draft positions. What happens is Club picks are pushed back firstly as free agency compensation is inserted, and then father/son & academy players are bid on and bids matched. So if as expected compensation for Ben Mackay comes in at 3 all picks after that are pushed back one position. Assuming Jed Walter comes in at 2 then our Pick 5 becomes Pick 6 pre-draft and slides back one further spot to Pick 7 on Draft Night. Gold Coast's Pick 4 becomes Pick 6. Do we want to use Pick 7 for O'Sullivan when he's rated as Pick 10? Everyone is talking about Swans using Pick 22 for Grundy but in reality that pick could end up as low as Pick 28 on Draft Night. We used Pick 27 to get Grundy in. I can't track exactly where that ended up last year with all the pick swaps but there were 3 father/sons & 1 North Academy selection in the Top 17 so I assume that 27 ended up at the equivalent of 31.

There's talk that Jordan Croft may not nominate as a Bulldogs Father/Son given their position with tall key position forwards. Is there any developments in this regard? Can't find anything on the internet re deadlines for father/son nominations pre-draft.

Well at least Melbourne now have picks 5, 13, 24, 32, 87 & 4459 points to play with. And one of Gold Coast's picks went slightly backwards (their Pick 31 going into the Finals is now Pick 34 as it's tied to GWS' finishing position). Both these developments will help us in our attempts to trade up to Pick 4.

I totally agree Melbourne weren't good enough. I wasn't making excuses for them losing. My point was it wasn't game style that beat us. Similarly, it wasn't because we were soft. Last year people said the same thing. That our attitude was wrong. That our game style was wrong. Also absolute BS. We lost finals last year because we were banged up, couldn't run games out, and didn't put the Swans & Lions away in the first halves of our finals when we dominated. It's so easy for fans & 'experts' to re-write history based on results. Last year Geelong had the softest draw of all time for a top team (gifted 4 games by playing North and the Eagles twice) & had easy Prelim & Grand Final against teams that had effectively played their Grand Finals the week before. If Geelong had lost their Qualifying Final to Collingwood who knows who would have been Premiers? The same applied for Melbourne this year. In 2021 Melbourne had all the luck, the last 2 years it's been the opposite. Attitude isn't the issue. For the AFL it's all about the optics. Michael Christian didn't want to even cite Maynard because he felt it was a football action. He was overridden. Of course when Maynard got off the AFL didn't appeal. They got exactly what they wanted. It looks like they did the right thing by Brayshaw and are absolved from the final outcome.

I'm happy we finished 6th istead of 5th. Better draft hand and no-one cares about 5th rather than 6th. I think everyone understands that the reference was to where we finished after the H&A round, which is also an important metric. In fact we have finished 1st, 2nd & 4th the last 3 years H&A, with records of 17 wins, 1 draw, 4 losses; 16 wins, 6 losses; 16 wins, 7 losses. So it's been pretty enjoyable pre-finals at least. For me one of the big positives this year is the way we have finished off games. We have been well-behind on a number of occasions but basically never give up. So much for Melbourne being a soft team (where do people get this [censored]?) 16 wins, 9 losses but our biggest loss was 27 points to Essendon way back in Round 5. Next biggest loss to Geelong by 15 points, Brisbane by 11 points, the other 6 losses all 7 points or less including 4 losses by under a goal. In many games have we lost crucial players mid-game but still come back to compete strongly.

Obviously every Melbourne supporter is going to support GWS against Collingwood. I'm not entirely convinced about GWS yet. They've beaten probably the weakest 2 teams in the finals in their 2 games. Having said that, Collingwood were extremely lucky to beat Melbourne. They will be strengthened by the return of Nick Daicos but he could be underdone. Collingwood aren't a great team despite the media hype so I'm hoping GWS can take it up to them. A Brisbane/GWS Grand Final would be fantastic. Also justified as Carlton are in a Prelim because they've won 2 games they should have lost (in both cases they were outplayed but their opponents couldn't convert when it counted), and Collingwood also should have lost against Melbourne.

What? Let's state the actual facts here. Melbourne should have won both finals this year. The problem wasn't our game style. It was purely and simply execution (plus injuries to key players at the wrong time). If Brayshaw had played against Carlton & Collingwood (he played the first 5 minutes) we would have won. If Van Rooyen had played against Carlton we would have won. If Melksham & Petty weren't out we would have won both finals. If we had kicked remotely straight and had a decent amount of luck we would have won. What exactly have Collingwood achieved so far? Didn't make the Grand Final last year and are in the Prelim this year when they don't deserve to be. We have absolutely nothing to learn from Collingwood's game style. Other sides have now worked them out. A good team but not a great one. Total BS. Melbourne aren't a soft team. We didn't lose either game because we were soft. Poor execution, yes. Lapses in concentration at key times, yes. What an idiotic comment about social work. Ben Brown clearly has chronic injury concerms and I'm happy he's making a difference to the world if he's not playing. Have his social work activities caused his inability to get on the park? NO. We play in Alice Springs for purely financial reasons. If we are there why wouldn't we support the local community?

Don't get me wrong. I'm as gutted about the way we went out as the next supporter and I don't know what you mean about stopping dreaming. Premierships are what it's all about and I would have been happy to forego every draft pick for the next 5 years for a Premiership. I see the need for people to vent, but I don't spend hours going through every negative post because personally reading largely irrational angry posts doesn't make me feel any better about what actually happened. All the Club can all do is learn the lessons, move on, and make the changes that will make a difference for the future. I suppose my take is that I never thought Melbourne would win even one premiership in my lifetime as a supporter (I started following them in the late 60s) so at least we have 2021 and I remain confident that we will win another one in the not-too-distant future.

I agree with you. Personally I'm fine with GC getting access to all their players but maybe the 20% points discount could only apply for the 1st player they take? I also agree that the points scale needs to be adjusted. There's a reasonable (but still inadequate) percentage drop off at the top but it flattens out very early. e.g. Pick 20 is only about 35% less points than Pick 10. When the general thought is that it would take Pick 4 plus Pick 5 at least to get Pick 1 there's something wrong as Pick 1 is 3,000 points and Picks 4 & 5 combined are 3912. According to the table Pick 1 is worth the equivalent of a combined Pick 8 & 9. Seriously!

Gold Coast will do whatever they think will enhance their list the most. They definitely won't make a call that they won't trade with Melbourne or Western Bulldogs just because those teams are half-decent. Of course they could hang onto 4 (or 5, as it will probably be) but why would they? What they need is points plus an enhanced draft hand for 2024 so they will definitely trade if the offers received are better in points equivalent than 4/5. I can't see them not taking the Acadedy boys unless another club makes a ridiculously high bid because Gold Coast get a 20% points discount. GC most definitely will get offers because a number of clubs will be keen to trade up (especially as all the picks below about 18 currently are likely to be pushed back 5 or 6 positions).

I started reading this thread trying to get a bit of a balanced view on this season but clearly too early for most people to see any positivity. My positive take for what it's worth. Our draft position is enhanced, we will get a better draw next season and losing like that was horrible but would have been considerably worse if it had been the Grand Final or even a Prelim next week in Brisbane (knowing that we would have had a great chance in the Grand Final the following week). Clearly we should have won last weekend which was the killer because we would have been close to a certainty to make the Grand Final and even win the whole thing. This week's loss even worse but if we had won we would have faced a considerably harder task next weekend against Brisbane.

Maybe we should be looking to trade up to 2 or 3 (or 1). North will probably have picks 2, 3, 16, 39, 53, 59, 76 and West Coast 1, 19, 35, 38, 54, 57, 75. If we're looking to trade up from 5 then why would we give up anything significant to move up one position? Unless of course there's a specific player Melbourne are interested in that might be available at 4 (likely to end up 6) rather than 5 (likely to end up 7).

The problem is 5, 15, 24, 34 are likely to end up something like 7, 21, 30, 40 if they're not traded. That's because North will likely get an extra pick for Ben Mackay plus get access to Ryley Sanders using points (7ish), Gold Coast will take Academy players at say 2, 9, 12, Western Bulldogs Jordan Croft Father/Son in the 11-14 range (although he may not nominate), Hawthorn Will McCabe Father/Son at 18. That might improve slightly if GC trade in picks 10 & 17 from Western Bulldogs and use one or both of them rather than on-trade. That's the reason why this draft in particular you want to trade out those mid-range selections. Now for Gold Coast they would be worth more because they would be using the points before those selections are pushed back so far (GC would value them at 15, 24, 34 because they would largely be used on Jed Walter at 2), Melbourne would value them at 21, 30, 40 because if they didn't trade them they would eventually be pushed back 6 spots.

I'm not really understanding this. Our picks 15, 24 & 34 are worth marginally more than 10 & 17 so why would the Bulldogs offer be hard to trump? Either trade would be a 400 net point gain for Gold Coast. Of course 15, 24 & 34 are premised on us finishing 4th and that could change. All the picks will be pushed back 1 if North gets an extra pick for Ben McKay which seems likely. That will of course change all the calculations. There are so many unknowns at the moment but Melbourne currently has 4317 points total which has us only behind West Coast with 5337 and North with 4421. Gold Coast has 4191 points which also puts them ahead of Melbourne as they will get to use most of them with a 20% discount applied. But they're not competing against Melbourne because they will use their points to get their 3 Northern Academy players (4,203 points required on Cal Twomey's currently predicted positions). Whichever way you look at it Melbourne is well-positiomed to move up.

What annoys me is the assumption by various media that it was a football act with no intention to cause injury. Who knows what the player's intention was? Supposedly they are all mindreaders. I was particularly [censored] off that Patrick Dangerfield seemed to be more concerned with asserting Maynard's innocence at length rather than showing any concern for Brayshaw's wellbeing. It looked to me that Maynard was genuinely trying to smother the ball but the fact that he turned his body and hit Brayshaw in the head should mean an automatic suspension. He had a duty of care and chose to not exercise it and the repercussions were serious. I don't like the comparison though with Kozzie's suspension earlier in the year. Kozzie launched himself off the ground and aimed fot Smith's head. He deserved to get suspended and it should have been longer. The reason it wasn't was purely due to good luck that he didn't cause injury.