old55

November 1

you think we think you're joking

Great news! GWS have 2 years at uncontracted players - so only players signed in 2013 are safe from them.

That's a fair bit of Hale. Have you seen that the AFL has restricted interchange to 3 and a substitute next year - I think forward who can ruck is vital - 2 ruckmen are dead. Rucking ability is not nice-to-have it's necessary.

Just to be clear - I'm not suggesting these tactics in preference to fast ball movement and kicking to a forward in space - unfortunately that option is not always available.

No kidding - problem solved then.

I'm just trying weight your opinion (and that of others who are raising objections) - I freely admit I haven't seen enough of him especially recently to have any informed view. I'm strongly behind the idea of recruiting his type but because of my lack of real knowledge about him I can't make a judgement of him specifically.

We've all seen greater defensive numbers and forwards out-numbered by backs. The regular kick into the forward line is spoiled and the extra defensive numbers can get to position and sweep it away with an overlap. I've been thinking about ways to combat this and have two left-field suggestions: 1. the hang-time kick: a la NFL punters, their KPI is hang-time (not distance) because it gives their team-matestime to get up the field to the ball drop and exert pressure on the ball carrier. We could adopt a similar approach to get more even numbers at the fall of the ball contest. 2. the ground ball: this one depends on forwards having greater ground skills than their opponents which with the increasing skill of backmen is not always the case. Kicking the ball in along the ground makes for a much more unpredictable outcome (particularly with our oval ball) which is what the defence hates. Highly skilled ground players like say Milne and Leon Davis will have a lot better chance with the bouncing ball coming in than the predictable regular kick on the full. I think mixing these up could create some confusion and panic in the back-line. The strategies would be combatted in time but recently innovators like Hawthorn and Collingwood have snatched flags.

What exactly have you seen of Hale?

ditto

That's the epitome of the bias that is rampant on these boards - Warnock worth 18 or 19, Maric's worth 29 and Hale's worth 35 - youve got to be kidding. Warnock and Hale are worth about the same and much more than Maric.

Would you take a 3rd rounder this year for say Mathew Warnock?

Yeah I wouldn't trade pick 12 for Hale - he's a role player. We should be aiming to draft more with that pick - I haven't read all the posts but I'd be surprised to see anyone advocating that. I think 2nd rounder is about right but there could be some to and fro depending on who pays his salary. If Hale is only worth 3rd or 4th rounder in this compromised draft he's really not worth having for the role we're talking about - end of discussion. I'm not thinking of him as a depth ruckman. I think dee-luded's posts about structure are on the right track.

I haven't seen much of Hale recently and I reckon it's a fair bet no-one else here has either. Looking at his ruck stats from years ago is meaningless, he had a reasonable goal return early in 2010. I reckon the FD would have a better idea - Dunbar and Prendergast. Tim Harrington is from North. He's the type and age we need that's what I do know - my main concern is not his rucking or marking - he needs to be competitive, it's his defensive ability. Gysberts, Tapscott, Fitzpatrick, Blease, Strauss, Maric, Petterd - we've got a fair amount of unrealised 2nd round or thereabouts talent on our list. I'm not shy of using a 2nd rounder on a specific role player and we may get back into it anyway. Mitch Clark would appear worth pursuing but I seem to recall some question marks when he was drafted. He'd cost 12 + player. If either of them measure up they'd be worth it I reckon - it's a piece we're missing. I think we can probably draft for our other deficiencies.

You seem unable to grasp that we want him as anchor forward who can relieve in the ruck, not as depth ruckman and therefore that's how he should be valued.

Biased North supporters will be saying exactly the opposite. Both players in an importannt role who are held out of the best 22 by better players - they have the same value.

Walking to work today I saw a guy putting a "for sale" sign in the window of his Commodore. I thought - gee that'd beat walking to work - I offered him my half-eaten donut and my coffee which was still mostly full.

Particularly at times like this ...

I do ask myself that question.

I'll trust the FDs assessment over yours or mine.

I can't see the link.

I believe he's saying trade for a Morton (along the lines of for a Grimes) not trade a Morton.

Agree Jack - I think the Blues are progressing but they're still some way off flag contention - this level of expectation would be a worrying development for Ratten.

Fantasyland

Agree and if Hale or whoever else is worth having for that role they're going to cost more than a 3rd rounder in a compromised draft. By definition a player that costs that much is probably not going to be worth having in that role (altho Brown is the exception because he was delisted by North I believe). 1st ruck depth for Jamar and Spencer is another question - rookie-ing the best state league player we can is probably the right price. One advantage of Hale is that he could play 1st ruck if required, compared with say Leigh Brown who is really just relief. With Hale we may get both requiremenst covered.