rpfc

Baby steps.

I have not found many posters that understand this - excellent point. I talk about trust on the field and this is what I mean; Nathan Jones doesn't need someone on the ground next to him as fights for the footy. He needs a person to hand it to outside of the contest so that he can make the most of the split second he wins the ball. I see far too many players right next to blokes who have won the footy. I see this at all levels of footy. How can you possibly help? There may be a sheppard if there is one other player and your teammate is on his feet and moving, but the way you can help is to trust him to win the footy and give him options, and if all areas are already covered by teammates then you can slink back and look to work defensively. The game is driven by outside runners and hard work offensively. There is too much preoccupation with defence and defensively minded players. Who dares wins.

I will like this post when it comes true, can you give us a hint as to the nature and owner of the deal?

Leaving aside that that wasn't the deal - your theory is correct - Pick 2 > Pick 9. But theory isn't reality. We are picking teenagers here, and the club identified 10 players that might pick at 2 who were very close, so we got some value out of the slide down to 9 with Tyson. We will be able to see how it went in a few years time, until then we really don't know if 'pick 9 is better than pick 2.'

No. If you are delisted you can be picked up in the designated DFA periods in the year you were delisted. He has been playing SANFL and he will have to go through the draft like everyone else.

And Clark? He's on the park less than Dawes. You can have worth off the field, and you can certainly show leadership there.

I think it the confidence is outwardly expressed more. I saw team full of players last year with close to zero self-confidence...

We will be better, C&B. We just have different ideas of how much better. November is not the time for depression.

Shut up, Jaded.

I am uneducated when it comes to underage talent - I come on here to gauge who we might take from those more on top of the information. I have heard he will go to Hawthorn inside Pick 30, I have also heard that he has no club interested. Then I see him referred to as a budding 'star' and a 'sure thing' and I see all these kids and I have seen failures. Many, many failures. Back up the claims that he is a star and advocate Pick 9 or tell me why you don't take him at Pick 9. I have heard the Pick 40 argument, and you are giving me that once again, tell me why he can't be picked at 9. Excellent for Pick 40. But why not Pick 9? Tell me why.

You mean, as you edited above... Can't get anything past ol' rpfc.

Neitz was 193cm.

So pick 9 then?

So...."This is the list guys! This is all we will have. Except you Dan; you're cut. This is all we have! Neville? You're cut. Those standing here are all we will have!! I can't wait to cut you next year, Lynden..." I don't really agree with the sentiment, Territory. We are getting a top 10 pick next year, and maybe a good player in FA/trade. We don't have a good list. There is more pain and change to come.

We all know and acknowledge the importance of stoppages. One of the main players in a stoppage is a ruckman. And Jamar averaged the same amount of kicks in 2010 to 2013, 4 more handballs in 2010, nearly 1 mark more in 2010, half a goal more in 2010, 1.3 tackles less in 2010, and 4 HOs less in 2010. He didn't do much more around the ground at all. An extra goal every two games and 4 handballs a game from his one extra mark. He got AA for his work with Moloney that was so publicised, and because of the dearth of good ruckmen. I have had a look at the past few years and the MFC is rarely out of the top 8 when it comes to HOs, but we are always the outlier when looking at clearances. The AFL average (minus the MFC) in clearances has been 37.6, 37.9, 38.1, and 35.1 in the past 4 years. The clearance average of the two teams above and two teams below us (in the HOs) is 39, 39.8, 38.8, and 36.2 in those years. The clearance average of the MFC has been 32.5, 33.9, 36.6, and 34.2 in those years. So the teams around us in hitouts have won 6.5, 5.9, 2.2, and 2 more clearances a game than us in those years. We should be doing better with the HOs we have been getting but we have not had the midfield to maximise the advantage the way that other clubs have.

Where are they on our list? This debate started because Jamar had been named as 1st ruck by posters. Jamar/Spencer/Gawn The above are our options. With Clark mooted for a FF/2nd ruck by Roos. I have argued that the importance of a ruckman at stoppages is still important and that the vast majority of ruckmen do not do much 'around the ground' and that it does not create enough of a point of difference to remove Jamar.

Whoa. What? Where are you getting this from?

NZ International rookie. Volleyball player.

Next to AAMI Stadium. Go to Richmond Station, and have look around the area. It's an impressive sporting precinct. Or you can park at Federation Square for a fee. Get your Melways out. Or your phone.

Exactly. We all want the ruckmen to be more involved but if we are talking about a few kicks and handballs, it is almost irrelevant. The ruckman's job first and foremost is in the job title. Everything else is peripheral.

Well, no, but the system is two years old. Hawthorn could have 'met' that ridiculous Franklin wage but that wouldn't have been the end of it - he could have gone to Sydney through the draft if he wanted to. Hawthorn wouldn't have got Pick 19 though. I said this before - if I was Hawthorn I would have put that threat out and said we will trade him. They didn't, they thought a whinge would be better and that's that. And, you are right, there should be less doubt about it; it should be like the NBA. But I really do wonder if the Players Assoc. know what they are getting themselves into as they push for US style 'freedoms' for players. That way leads to players traded without their consent, non-guaranteed contracts, and clubs re-signing players against the players will (which is what we would be talking about here if the AFL had an NBA like system).

And another option - he stays on the salary that the other club offers. Or he rejects the other clubs offer and stays on the terms we would like. I should make a Process Model... Nah.

[scoff] Of course it is far more important to have a midfield. [scoff] I am telling you that there remains a direct correlation between the best rucks and the best clearance teams - as in they are exactly the same. Rucking is important. You can 'invert the argument' all you like but you would be rejecting the fact that HOs beget clearances.

Ok, you arrogantly handsome bastard - I will do it: Clark, Dawes, Jones, Trengove, Grimes, Vince, Garland, and Watts are the only players I can see being paid more than Frawley even if he was paid a lower than market salary. So I think we should be ok. He will be a RFA.