rpfc

We need to bring in talent full stop. Would I spend a top 10 pick on a 26+ year old? Probably not. But would I do another Vince trade with a second round pick? Yes please!

You have got to get in your head that Pick 9 is far better than Pick 22 and when it comes to any metric - a top 10 pick will be exponentially more valuable than a pick in the 20s. We also got Hunt and GWS passed on the later pick we exchanged in that deal if you are purely being pedantic. I even heard that Viney and co. had Salem at 4 and we were delighted when the trade effectively meant two top 5 talents for 1 top 5 talent and a second round pick. If you don't think we got value just say so - because that is all we are saying - that we maximised our position at the top of the draft and got a couple of young guns who look likely. More of the same this year, please.

Pick 2, Tyson, Pick 9, Pick 22. Which one is the outlier? It was a 2 for 1 for pointy end talent.

That's not how it works. And the NBA has a lottery (the NHL has similar) and last has a 25% chance, and then it diminishes from there - those that play 'finals' have no chance to get the first pick. And only the first 3 picks are done via lottery - the rest is done normally via where teams finish. And some of the most obvious instances of tanking in world sport have happened in the NBA since the adoption of the lottery. Below are some recent articles about tanking in the NBA and how to fix it. So moving to their solution might not be their solution in a few years... http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-nbas-possible-solution-for-tanking-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel/ http://grantland.com/the-triangle/nba-lottery-reform-is-coming/

It's as important as last weeks game and next weeks game. And isn't MORE important because it's a game we might win.

Do you really think that players decide who they kick to based on how well like that player is? Roos seems to have answered our queries about how he is playing from his perspective. That would be valuable, no?

That's tanking if you think the Melbourne of 2008-2009 tanked. It isn't just player people in 'foreign' positions like the audacious decision to play Frawley and Warnock forward (fast forward a few years and they both played a game against each other in their respective forward lines). It's recruiting nothing but kids, its sending pros to early retirements, its early season ending surgeries, its resting of players - it is setting your team up to lose. So if you don't think that GWS should be penalised for setting their team up to lose since its inception - then you don't think we tanked. Personally, I have a narrower view of tanking to make it actually worthwhile having a rule against it. Trying to prove tanking is like catching smoke with your bare hands.

Sigh.

I don't disagree. But the list of players that would be at risk if we had more depth would be quite a few before we get to Watts... HFF is a position at the mercy of the team - I am sorry to say this about a former number 1 pick but it is the case for all forwards - they need others to get them the ball. When I look at the form of our forward line and our back line it is through the prism (and prison) of our third rate midfield. I am sorry if this sounds like a cop out, or making excuses - I call them 'reasons' - but we still are; - 18th in I50s with 40 a game. The average teams have about 50. - 17th in Clearances with 34 a game. The average teams have about 38. Stats like the above don't tell the full story but we move the ball slowly, and poorly, and get it less than other teams - how can a HFF, or any forward, show their best in that environment? Geelong are 18th in Clearances for those who like a good story about stats, but they get the footy 13 more times a game than us and get it into our forward line 11 more times a game. That tells me that they move the ball form their backline, through the middle, and into their forward line quickly and well and give their forwards the chance to have 9 more scoring shots a game than us.

Well written perhaps, but what the point of it I don't know... I am a Red Sox fan so this is something I have thought about in the past - but I don't attach any meaning to the colours, history, and city parallels that abound. Bartlett was purely trying to say that he wants the Demons to be an attraction when folks travel to Melbourne and he should be criticised alone for that - not for some cross-sport 'impossible dynasty' critique that this bloke has eloquently spurted into that article. As for Bartlett's point; I am reminded of what Pagan used to say - "Show me the baby, don't tell me about the pregnancy." Well, I don't think the 'baby' is possible, so please tell me about the 'pregnancy'; how exactly do you see this eventuating?

I know, and I then did the same, and then allowed someone to make a joke on my joke thinking it was a non-joke.

Roos has played him in every game. He has established himself. In Dunn's 7th year he played 11 games. And Watts will be Watts, not Goddard, not Dunn. He can be a high HFF that pushes into the forward line with excellent kicking skills and vision. As a Demon - I want that. I want that player.

No, he didn't. That's the joke...

I saw with my eyes. And Dunn failed as a tagger and failed as a forward. He had terrible judgment and thought that toughness was one jumper punch away. In 2013, his 9th year on the list - he established himself as a defender and a member of the best 22. According to Roos, HFF is the role that Watts can excel in make his own - and is in the process of doing that. Well ahead of Lynden. And my point wasn't that all players get 9 years to come through - my point was that the time, patience, and faith shown in certain players should be reciprocated to other players if the coach can see something. Evidently, Roos can see something.

Maybe if you read past my first line you might be less antsy?

Well said. I have no problem with people being wrong on players - we all are - I just really hate the term 'clogger' and terms like it and the nonsense it implies about the people that are described in such a way. My inference is that Jetta was never a 'clogger' and that his emergence should make people pause about how they regard players.

I am so glad they are not rushing him back to play this piddly little game against GWS. WCE in Perth will be a big event for one of the boys and that sometimes can be enough to get the rest of the boys up and about. And performing over in Perth will be a big step for this group.

Yes, Dunn and Pedersen are more comfortable with the physical side of the game (although we all remember the aftermath of Pedersen's first game do we not?). But that isn't everything in footy is it? Watts is ahead of Dunn at the same stage in their career - some should stop right now and drink that in a little bit - and Watts has shown more with regard to skill execution and decision making and hard running than many, and all of those have improved markedly over the previous years.

A few on here get frustrated when I talk about 'role players' but Roos is proving me right this year with the specific roles he has given Pedersen and Jetta. If you can stick to your task and be that little cog in the machine you can be very useful once all the other little cogs are doing theirs. But you need a motor to get everything going and moving quick and our 'engine room' just doesn't have the capacity or quality that other teams have (just to bring that back to a common footy metaphor).

Not as interesting as the posters who were convinced that Jetta was a 'list clogger' being proven utterly and completely wrong to the point where their own introspection should put into question their knowledge of football. Because no-one goes from 'list clogger' to one of the best small defenders in the game...

Here is the current status of the list after Jetta being upgraded. I am inclined to believe Riley has another year on his contract but who knows with Clisby? That is not rhetorical. Who knows?

Johnstone got us Grimes and Sylvia got us Vince. I am really glad someone else sees what I am saying - if we go to footy clubs in October and ask what can we get for Watts - we will be given a smirk and a bad deal. Roos and co. have to make a decision based on the chances a draft pick can be better than Watts and the chances Roos can make a consistent player out of Watts. If Roos has a 30% chance to get something out of Watts and the draft pick would have a 16% (1 in 6) of being a success - Roos should back himself. This is incredibly unscientific and judgement based, but Roos has got to say to himself whether he can see something - and if he can - back himself and the club he is rebuilding.

One mans list clogger is another mans excellent small defender. I am so happy for him and the club and the fans. Well done to him and well done to all the (many) various admins that kept him around for him to make such a difference in 2014.

Rewritten to make sense.

Like Dunn and Jetta... The club and its list manager should make the best decision available to it at the time for the players they will bring and those that are out of contract - draft well, recruit well. Rise and repeat. That is how you build a list, not by making decisions based on emotion which, I am sorry to say, I think you are advocating and that I know Neeld made. Martin for Pick 54, Moloney for nothing, Morton for nothing a year before his contract was up - these were never sound decisions whatever one feels about the player - the list sighed and creaked at the lack of desire to get value from the player (either in output on the list or through their trade/future deletion). Those that want us to remove Tapscott, Blease, Strauss, Bail, Byrnes, Terlich, and Nicholson with Clark and Frawley gone or likely to go AND pay out the contracts of (or trade away for nothing) Evans, McKenzie, Fitzpatrick, and M.Jones AND trade out Watts and Trengove for the sake of parlaying a message to the group - those that see this as right and proper are never going to see the list being properly built; 15 players out for the possible return of Pick 4 and 30 for Frawley and Watts. And the requirement to use the last 5 or 6 picks in the ND just to fill out the list. I shudder to think how the list would look like if Neeld had another off-season in charge - don't we all? Well, those that advocate the massive cleanout at the end of this season - that's what you leering toward even if you don't see it.