old55

Good post KD - let me turn it round the other way - getting hammered by a half-strength under-cooked Hawthorn line-up will hurt and just serve to further cement our perceived basket-case status. We need a credible performance.

that doesn't answer the question either - I've heard variously that it's 3 months and 4 months. I want the DOB eligibility for 2008, 2009 and 2010.

That's great and interesting Stigga! But it's not what I'm after.

The 2009 Draft pool is going to be cut because the age eligibility is going to be raised compared with 2008. Can someone please tell me what the 2008 DOB was compared with the 2009? Is the 2009 DOB cut-off going to be the standard going forward? Or are we going to revert to the 2008 dates in 2010 and 2009 will have a special big pool? thx

Seems to me that Government rather that enterprise is spending at present. Maybe that's where we should be looking for sponsorship. The TAC provided major sponsorship to Richmopnd and Collingwood. Workcover has been investing heavily in prime time advertising lately - maybe they are a possibility? Who else?

Agreed he looked to be a ball magnet. He seems like he's got the Darryl White two handed ball drop - I've never liked it.

Ranking players is an interesting concept - it's difficult to combine contribution and potential. And potential is very hard to measure. When I went to training in late 2003 I thought I was looking at the new Mark Riccuito when I saw Colin Sylvia. Warnock is probably going to have more contribution value than Watts in 2009. And contribution not only depends on skills but it depends on getting them out on the field. There's a fair chance that Warnock will (again) have more contribution than Rivers in 2009 if current trends continue. I prefer a ranking of absolute current contribution (score out of say 10 points) to the 1st 22 year each year. Say in 2008 Warnock would be rated a 5 and Martin a 2 or maybe a 3. In 2009 Warnock may again get a 5 and Martin gets a 5, 2010 Warnock is locked on 5 and Martin is on 7. Potential is measured in the change in absolute rating over the years - then we don't get confused about say Sylvia's, Rivers' and Bell's value. How many times have they rated an absolute 5 or more and what's the trend? Just rank them in order of how good they are right now - real potential is shown in an increase in these values. There's the issue of "depth" players, but depth players are only worth hanging onto if they have ranked 5+ for some reasonable time in their careers and have proven value - Godfrey or Ward anyone?

You've got it.

The pitfalls of blue sky mining ... old demonology thread no disrespect to CHF intended.

Indeed, name a player who's flying on the track or having their best season for years and dollars-to-donuts it'll be the the player who is out of contract at the year's end. Gotta love one year contracts.

Yes but as Jack Kennedy said to Marilyn Monroe "If you've only one trick, that's the one to have". I couldn't see Newton earned his contract extension in any way, shape or form but on the other hand if he had been at another club, was delisted and was going for free in the PSD then I reckon there'd be support for us picking him up. He's worth another look at IMO.

I think we're in agreement. Newton's problem is his attitude. Not everyone in the league can mark and kick as well as Newton - Miller is a good example. I can't help you if you can't see that Newton's skills are superior to Miller's, but Miller's attitude is far superior to Newton's. I wouldn't exactly call Newton a disappointment, he was drafted at 49 or so and that means he was speculative. It's disappointing that he hasn't been able to realise his talents but that was always the risk. Similarly with Miller drafted at 55, also speculative, but he's delivered on the speculation to play 100 AFL games, his great commitment overcoming his skill limitations. My main point is that it's WYSIWYG with Miller now and he's a good ordinary footballer, Newton could be more, but I agree that it's quite likely he wont even be that.

I really like Miller but he's got his limitations. I think a club needs players like Miller and Bartram who give their all. Miller's not as good as Mooney (who I reckon is ordinary) but could be in the same ballpark and Mooney is a premiership KPF. Newton has the potential to be a superior player but he has a different set of limitations. Miiler has worked very hard and is probably approaching his peak - there's not much improvement there, the same can't be said of Newton, he's younger and was drafted (a little bit) earlier and they were the criteria I loosely used when there were multiple contenders - I'm looking for scope for improvement. Competitiveness can't be underestimated and Miller has that all over Newton - right now in the crunch of a GF like last year's I'd take Miller's approach over Newton's talent. It's a pity we can't fuse Miller's attitude onto Newton, it's not a new idea, we all thought that about Godders and Johnstone for instance. I expect Watts to make all our forwards much more effective players with the defensive attention he will draw away from them.

Correct decision - well done Junior and Cam.

The fact that there's alternatives is even better - you can have Jamar for Spencer, Miller for Newton, Aussie for Maric, Bartram for Dunn and Buckley for Blease if you like, I generally picked the younger alternative or the earler drafted alternative in each case because there should be more scope for improvement.

We've been short on midfield class but hopefully we've picked some up recently with Morton, Grimes, Blease, Strauss, maybe Bennell - who knows. We need a bit more coming thru and some early picks next year too would be nice. Together with McLean who is class if he can get fit and some of the decent players we have like Jones, Moloney and Petterd hopefully we have the makings of a strong midfield. Heaven help us if we don't because it's going to be a long tough period thru the GC draft concession years. I think the sentiments in the thread title are close to the mark.

I think our list is starting to take some shape and there's plenty to look forward to and be optimistic about - with current stocks in 4-5 years we could have a 22 that has come thru together: B: Frawley Garland Warnock Rivers Martin Strauss C: Morton Moloney Blease Spencer Grimes McLean F: Davey Watts Bate Sylvia Newton Maric I: Johnson Jones Petterd Dunn One more cycle of early picks would be nice.

Clearly Allen Jakovich heads the list.

We're harsh on our own because we know them too well. Todd Viney was at least as good as Scott Thompson and I'd wouldn't call Todd a star. We've had briefly burning stars since Flower but they haven't peformed on a consistent basis for one reason or another - Brian Wilson in his Brownlow year, Schwarz in 94, even Stynes in 91 if you like that kind of play. Consistent elite performance is probably part of the definition of star. Don't get me wrong tho, Scott Thompson or Brad Sewell would be very nice to have at our club right now.

Rucks do make a difference if you get dominated and the opposition gets sufficient taps to advantage. I think you can't afford weak rucks, but you don't need dominant rucks. IIRC in the close GF Keating had to ruck alone, admittedly against not much opposition, maybe there's a link there. IMO he deserved the NSM in 2003 and was a key difference, altho stoppage tactics were key also, he punched the ball into space clear of the Pies mids who were excellent in close - Lica was at his prime. That was the Pies key, their rucks we're weak but their contested ball winning close to the stoppage was excellent, in 2003 the Lions short-circuited this with Keating smashing the ball forward at every opportunity and Fraser couldn't stop him doing it. BTW Spencer is getting talked up and he sounds like a better version of Jamar - perhaps like Keating - he doesn't sound like he'll make much impact around the ground. I'm OK with that but the enthusiasm for him seems a bit inconsistent with the "hitouts don't matter, it's around the ground impact" theory. Maybe a Jamar/PJ combo gives us maximum flexibilty and if Spencer is a better Jamar then hey! "Secondary stoppage" maybe a new idea/term at centre bounces but the Swans have specialised in this for years at all other stoppages. If they can't win the clearance they force another stoppage until they do win - that's been their plan A.

I'm still hopeful on McLean. I think he's possible elite. As you say - it depends on if he can get his body right . I think he has delivered elite quality e.g St.Kilda final, just not on a consistent basis yet because of injury. If he plays 20 games this year he'll win the Bluey and if we start to win games in the next few years he'll give the Brownlow a big shake. IMO he's still most likely on our list to be elite simply on exposed AFL form. I reckon your McLean description fits Jonesy and I expect nothing less from him.

Keating was important to the Lions flags. In 2001 (with McDonald) and particularly in 2003 (with Charman) he dominated the ruck and that reinforces Phoenix's coment where Alessio-Barnes and then poor Josh Fraser virtually one-out were unable to make an even contest. In 2002, in the close one against Collingwood he had to ruck all day by himself becasue McDonald was injured, but he was still able to defeat McKee and Rocca - not exactly Lade and Brogan. Collingwood's weak rucks really helped Brisbane. In 2004 Lade and Brogan at least broke even with Keating and McLaren who was a weak link in the contest. If you alow a ruck combination to dominate it can have devastating effects in big games. It's important to provide a consistent contest in the ruck and that means having two competent ruckmen - you cannot afford weak rucks. Keating was a better version of Jamar - he had a total of 13 kicks and only 27 possessions in 4 GFs. A player like Jamar has the ability to negate Keating's ruck dominance if he has a solid partner and rucking becomes a nil-all draw. It's about application of limited resources - I'd rather force a nil-all draw in the ruck and concentrate on winning the other areas which have more impact.

I really like Bartram but his kicking is a worry deep in the backline and if he can't train/run hard and long on his knee (which I read is bone-on-bone) then he loses one of his attributes for run-with and he may struggle for a role. The coaches clearly like him with his high finish in the B&F last year and he was named as one of this preseason's highlights in something I read - so hopefully it will pan out for him.

It would be worth trying Bell as a run-with in the midfield if he's over his OP problems. He has pace and strength and has done some good stopping jobs in the backline but further upfield his tendency to panic a bit wont be exposed so much. Bartram is a very good run-with but I reckon he may struggle to run out games after his knee problems. Dunn I think offers more as a defensive forward on the attacking half-back e.g. Hodge.

The critical ruck contests are likely to be deep inside the 50 with no genuine ruckman contesting them. The result of a tap to advantage here is likely to be a goal. Forwards who can ruck a bit will increase their value. And it will be crucial to have tall backs who can at least nullify the tap to advantage.