old55

What are you expecting to hear that will satisfy you?

So what's your explanation of what's happening? Is there a possibility that Oliver is tradable? If so why?

Perhaps people will be happier if the club comes out and says that "we're open to trading Clarrie because he’s just too good and we want to give other clubs a chance. We saw how well Trac and Jack did at the Brownlow with him out injured and we think they could win it if we trade him." There are clearly major ongoing issues with Oliver's behaviour that have caused this to escalate. Everyone understands his value and I'm confident the club will have been working very hard to resolve the issues but it must have reached a tipping point. As others have posted, it's not possible to trade Oliver without talking to other clubs about it and then it's not possible to control leaks. There has to be an explanation for why this is happening and I don't think the one above is plausible. Therefore stories of bad behaviour will emerge to support the situation.

Did you see him marche on Le Champs Elysees?

Twomey and Beveridge are two of the best analysts and most informed AFL journos. You fancy yourself in the draft and trade space, surely you must acknowledge that Twomey is very good in this area.

Don't cut off your nose to spite your face ...

Makes sense if we cycle him to the Rookie list

If they believe the deal will advantage them they'll still do it.

and get JVR instead ...

I agree Watson's kicking seemed rushed and a bit erratic in that GF but his ball winning and handling at full pace (and his is fast) was very impressive.

Sorry it was my mistaken axes labelling - the x axis is time and the y axis expected score and win probability. So as you expect. Don't blame the author for my mistake (now corrected above in the original post for first time reader clarity) The goal scoring position charts are very informative. I am old school on this, a big fan of Edward Tufte. He would be happy with the work we're discussing. Suggest you look just a little bit harder. Did you actually expand the Tweet?

One major factor in Collingwood's win, despite their overall inaccuracy, was their finishing from set shots outside 50 at crucial times. Crisp x 2 (he did it against us too from exactly the same spot), De Goey and Sidebottom all nailed long goals - we very rarely do that. There's ball to be marked around the 50 and we can do that but we rarely convert from there - either the long kick to the pocket for a stoppage or take the risk of a point and turnover. Who do we have with the range and accuracy? Petracca, Sparrow and Rivers definitely have the length. Melksham has both but will be out - maybe McAdam can do it? Petty and Joel Smith may be able to - not enough examples yet. Salem probably used to be able to but seems to have lost a lot of depth. This is a very important asset when the 50 is crowded.

I think it's important to get elite talent from developing states to the clubs in those states. Take away the points discount and enforce that the first matching pick has to be within one round ie 18 picks of the bid. Firmly re-instate that picks must equal available list spaces. That will ensure fairer value is paid.

It's a very good graphical representation of the data. The x axis is time, the y axis is expected score and the dotted line is chance of winning. One thing I saw immediately from the score charts was confirmation that Collingwood kicked 4 goals from set shots outside 50. That was a huge difference in this game.

Is everyone on the streets of Adelaide talking about the McAdam trade? I knew it was a bit boring there but that is a surprise!