Nasher

A win by 100 points should do.

Harmes, Kent and Tyson were the three mentioned by Plapp from the VFL game - which Bugg didn't play. Probably just an oversight based on that. I agree with rjay that it will probably be Bugg and Tyson.

I've always wondered why we have to do that. Why force us to name players we have no intention of playing? It's weird. Don't understand why the AFL don't just allow the clubs playing on the Sunday to name 22-25 players and leave the clubs to decide how to use that.

Watts 2009, McDonald 2011.

Fair enough - probably a crud comparison in hindsight. I suppose my point is that it appears to be a regular feature in his game - most players would have done that about zero times in their careers.

I asked him and he didn't know either.

The Weideman running goal also featured a pretty handy one handed collect off the ground and handball to Petracca, not too dissimilar to the one in the Isaac Smith clip, though not under as much pressure. I wonder if he's got really big hands - seems like a very difficult thing to do at pace.

What does that even mean?

Pedersen for me is a hot standby forward for if Weideman struggles or tires. I'd prefer him to have VFL form as a forward than play position ping pong with him in the seniors. I really don't think the medium defender we have lost creates a vacancy that urgently needs filling. It's not like ruck or a KP whereby anyone semi-capable is better than no one - we proved this week that we can get by with improvising in that space.

Possibly harsh assessment of Keilty who by all reports had a strong season in the VFL last year, but otherwise agree that it was an absurd suggestion.

I'm a Kent fan, but I'm unsure the mix is right with him in. With he, Garlett, ANB, Hannan and maybe Petracca in the side, we've got too many half forwards in the side who can't (or coaches won't allow) yet do much else. You could argue they could rotate through the middle more and that gets suggested a lot, but I haven't seen a lot of evidence that this actually happens much. I think it more likely we'll add two mids, with Lewis and Jones increasing their responsibilities on halfback to cover Vince. I think it will be Tyson and Bugg in for Vince and Smith.

Not a phenomenon unique to Melbourne supporters.

You have Gawn in there twice in your Goodwin votes. Think the second one (for 2 points) is meant to be Hogan? Thanks for the breakdown.

Boooooo. I want all the goals!

Vast improvement on the avatar old son.

Ah, the old "mongrel" trait. The most easy way to identify when a poster grew up watching footy in the 70s and 80s.

Thought this would be a thread about picking Oliver. I love that they've been able to find gems late in the draft like Hunt, Hannan etc, but it's nailing those early picks that the previous bunch muffed that will project us towards the top 4. It looks so far that all of Oliver, Brayshaw, Petracca and Salem will at least be very good, with Oliver almost certainly going to be in the top echelon if not already. There's always misses in the top 20 but we seem to have gone from one extreme to the other. It's just such a relief knowing our key picks are in such good hands.

Even when there was another Jones on the list, 95% of the time there was still no need to differentiate.

Goodwin clearly fancies himself as a better coach than Goodwin. Happy to be wrong, just called it as I saw it.

Tyson in for Smith. Not a like for like exchange obviously but unless they plan on throwing Keilty to the wolves, we're fresh out of medium defenders. No other change. Kent is the only player realistically under consideration I'd have thought, but I'm happy enough for Garlett, ANB and Hannan for the time being.

We still doing this?

I noticed - TOG% is my favourite stat :-) He won't ever play the whole game though - 85% is what first string midfielders see usually, so that is the target. 75% is big compared to what he did in the past, so his tank is obviously vastly improved. That's not to detract from the effort though. Today the only players to have spent less time on the ground were Smith and Melksham.

Same. Having Jordan Lewis contribute to a carve-up for us is just icing on the cake - they could definitely have used him today. A lot of the narrative from Hawthorn supporters gave an attitude of nonchalance about the whole thing, but I thought at the time they should have been filthy about the way he and Mitchell were moved on - I sure would have been. I think they will be soon enough.

I finally just start to decide I'd definitely prefer Essendon to win because watching Hawthorn get done is just so enjoyable, but then the commentators start again with the "oh poor Essendon" shieet and it makes me want to chuck. I'd forgotten how good a player Dyson Heppell was though.

Plan B: "start playing good"? Hard to tell on TV of course, but I didn't see any amazing tactical or structural changes. We just turned up the dial.