Stiff Arm

51 minutes ago, Gator said:

I take it back about Caddy.  His first 60 seconds are particularly special.

 

Weid-esque!

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

He will be a much better key forward when he doesn't have to help out in the ruck.

IMO it is affecting his game as a key forward.

Equally, JVR will be better when playing 3rd tall, rather than 1st tall forward 

11 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

We also delisted K Turner, meaning we're taking an extra pick to the draft now. We will now take 3 players plus rookie upgrades instead of 2 plus rookie upgrades. That likely means we tried to trade up, couldn't get a deal done, and now are taking 6+11+42 all to draft.

42 might be Brown, or might be a project player (ruck?) and Brown is rookied

8 hours ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

Once Gold Coast select all their academy players, plus Hawks and Dogs take their F/S options pick 42 may come into a pick in the mid 30s. You would think that may interest Geelong if they want to be taking multiple players at the draft.

They currently have picks 8, 25, 76, 87 & 94.

 

Hawks and dogs picks used for matching F/S will be after 42. They each have one early pick and then only late picks to be used for points. 

Only GCS picks will be before 42, six picks before then to go towards 3 players.

3 GCS+Croft+McCabe=5

GCS use 6 picks before our 42

So our pick should move up to 41

Is that correct?

5 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

North lease the ground at Arden Street. The problem is if you sink club money into the facilities and more importantly how much. Hard to sell a grandstand on leased land.

The problem of grandstands etc may limit the use of Caulfield as a match day venue for AFLW etc. Assuming the race club wants to protect line of sight views of the back straight for punters.

Most, if not all, of the money would be public money from govts, so if we were to eventually leave, the facility would have to stay in public ownership

Unless we fund the majority, who are we to claim rights?

5 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes. Kingston have f$&@ the Saints over many times, because they own the land. 
I wouldn’t build a Multi $Million Complex on someone else’s land

The funding would largely come from govt and private contributions. Community inclusion would be necessary. Whatever the Club puts in would be depreciated over time anyway.

Keep doubling down, but you're not gonna win this battle

8 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Not if we don’t own the land, that could be absolutely diabolical in years to come….

Does Coll own the Olympic ground or the old swimming pool? Richmond? Carlton? North Melb? Saints? Brisbane? No, of course they don't 

A long lease is fine and common practice. 

"Diabolical" is a tad hysteric, even for you, WYL!

2 hours ago, Bates Mate said:

I haven't seen said reports. What is his projected height ?

Iirc there's a recent article somewhere that claims he's 197cm.

2 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

Surely a couple of them would finally play as small forwards should and crumb the packs and keep the ball inside 50 when it hits the deck. We’ve had a serious problem in successfully doing this for the past 2 years.

Try 5 years!

Even during 2021 we did a lot of long bombing hoping for crumbing to work, which it did with Kossie and even Spargonicus.

The connection btwn mids and forwards is the main issue imo, but that's for another thread

So if we select Watson, our small to small/med forwards will be Watson, Kossie, McAdam, Chandler, Spagonicus, ANB. All with differing rolls, of course, but that's a crowded grouping

Unless Watson has potential to eventually play midfield, I'm not sure what the strategy is. 

It's usually best available at the pointy end of the dtaft, which might be him.

I'm hoping for a classy mid at 6 (7). We need to develop the next A grade mid

I think North will either give up 2+3 for 1, or far more likely, use 2 and 3 on Duursma and McKercher 

On top of their current crop, those two will help set them up for success over the next 10 years; that is, if North can maintain stability and not implode again

1 hour ago, Roostwo said:

I really hope we don’t take Curtain, as much as I personally think he is a star- he will be back at Freo as soon as he can - unfortunately.   

Do you know him personally?

6 hours ago, Deespicable said:

How about the universe where we need a potential key forward more than anything else.

Having watched his highlights, we will take Caddy at No.6 because we can't risk him being taken at 7, 8, 9 or 10.

The only reason we won't is that he may yet go to North at pick 3 - his agility makes him impossible to overlook.

Can't see us picking a key forward with our first pick 3 years in a row. We've got JVR, Petty, Jefferson as our tall forward mix, with Schache as support. However, I can see us going after a key forward FA in 2024

Hopefully Sanders with 6, and we trade 11 and F1st for 7 or 8 (O'Sullivan)

On 19/10/2023 at 17:43, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

Door. Horse. Bolt.

If you believe certain other threads.

Dunstan, Hunter, and now Billings?

21 minutes ago, picket fence said:

On the basis we might need another mid I would be moving Heaven and Earth to get Reid

Agreed, but I find it hard to see how we can match Norf's bounty.

Otherwise, I'd be keen to go for pick 2 or 3 from Norf. McKercher or Duursma would be grand, but not for 6, 11 and F1st. That's a bridge too far

Reckon it might be 11 and F1st for 7 or 8.

I'm hoping Lamby and Taylor are targeting O'Sullivan 

Imagine Sanders/Curtain and O'Sullivan...

7 minutes ago, old55 said:

Or take him with 6

True. But if Sanders is available at 6, I think he may become a Dee.

Wouldn't it be good to get a classy mid AND a key back in this draft?

I think adding midfield class is a high priority in this draft

I can see us enquiring about what 11 and F1st would get. Maybe 8 or 7?

11 will become 15 or 16 after academy bids. If Lamb, Taylor and Goody are set on O'Sullivan, they'll need to get higher than that

12 hours ago, DemonOX said:

I took from what lamb said was that the MFC will get his family from sa more involved and over more during next season. 

Imo This may go along way to appeasing Pettys desire to go home. 

But also worth remembering that Petty is contracted for 2 more years, '24 and '25. No one forced him to sign the contract. Adelaide will be asked to cough up next year if they want a contracted player that we've invested heavily in

42 will end up being around 33 by the end of bid matching

We can still use it to trade up higher right up to draft night

1 hour ago, deejammin' said:

If we can go into the draft with pick 6, 11, McAdam, Fullarton, Billings and a backup ruck like Lycett we’ll have done incredibly well.
Billings as wing depth, two potential ruck options should Gawny get sore or need a rest and some x-factor for the forwardline. That ticks all our boxes.
Not to mention some potential gun mids or a move for one exceptional talent. Go Dees!

Indeed.

We used a 2nd and two 3rds to bring in Fullerton, Billings and McAdam. 

Lost Jordan, Harmes and Grundy: depth or surplus to needs. Hibberd, Dunstan retired.

And we have 6 and 11 to use in the draft

I think that's a good outcome

Paul Roos will be relieved we finally landed Billings 

1 hour ago, Jaded No More said:

Because Reid is a far superior player, even if he is a flight risk.

The question is, do West Coast prefer 2 top 11 picks, one of which could certainly be Curtin who are they are after, or do they prefer to take the risk on Reid with pick 1.

Yet no one knows if Reid or Curtain will be flight risks. Both have come out and poured water over such claims. In fact Curtain seemed to look forward to potentially living interstate, according to the interview I heard. Not all draftees want to live where they grew up.

I reckon the Reid/Curtain flight risk thing is a myth

18 minutes ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

Apart from anything else, WITH A FOOT INJURY??!!

Might've been mini golf

🤣