IvanBartul13

McLean was fourth in a rising star, third in a B+F, 10th and then 2nd in a B+F from 14 games. For two or three seasons he was the heartbeat of the side, with James McDonald, and then he was traded for a first round draft pick. Very good player at his best and then placed in a Carlton B+F as well.

four members of the coaching group/match committee can give players between 0-10 votes per game - max 40.

Unusually off point here - Cameron drafted Chris Lamb, Cale Morton, Addam Maric, Jack Grimes who all underachieved. The concept of using teams doesnt work because of tenure length differences. Youve also not put forward the best 22s. James Magner would be in Prendergasts as an example. To say Prendergast only drafted two AFL calibre players is Spiritedly wide of the mark and unfair to at least a few of Howe, Jetta, Tom McDonald, Scully, Watts and Jurrah. Of course he wasnt a good recruiter but he still made some very good picks and Gysberts was traded for Cam Pedersen and the origin points of Fritsch, May and Sparrow’s careers come from Prendergast’s recruiting. He also had the worst coach in Melbourne’s history using his talent and interfering.

The backend of his career he sought of lost momentum, but he was very unlucky to not win a best and fairest (more votes per game than Jonesy in one of his years but played one less game) and went toe to toe with Buddy Franklin in his prime and held his own.

I think if no bid comes we will draft him with our last pick anyway, similar to Toby Bedford situation

Good post, but I'm not really sure how your dot points really conflict with my post. I'm just suggesting that expectations of him as a forward be tempered because of the level of competition he was up against at WAFL colts level, which were basically and mostly smaller non-AFL prospects, and because as a 194cm specimen multiple clubs who would definitely love to have a forward with those dimensions bypassed him. That's not to say he won't develop into a fine player at all.

To be fair he hasnt trashed the player in my view, but rather the concept of drafting him with a high pick - and with some sensible reasoning. I don't necessarily agree but have never felt his comments had anything do with him being from Sudan either, other than that fact linked him to our academy. He's been very unflattering about Mac's arm girth, all the same.

Incredible football oddity, Richard Lounder, but he was actually a mature age behemoth when drafted and with the turning circle of a polar ice cap. The skinniest ruckmen/KPPs to pass my eye and be drafted were Andrew Erickson to Sydney and Tony Bourke Carlton. They were absolute rakes and I think Bourke played a couple of games but Erickson didn't. I think both struggled to add meat to their frames which killed their careers. Neither had Andrew's spring or ballskills, so they arent good guides i dont think. He is pretty much a completely unique footballer that is impossible to project.

Not sure in what way I've been tough. I've said I thought he would be drafted higher and surprised that Brisbane - and Sydney, in particular once Tom Brown was taken ahead by Richmond- didn't take him ahead of us to be honest. I've compared him as a defender to a good player in Harry Petty, but i think as forward, whilst he's performed very well at Colts level and other junior levels, there isn't a big positive sample size of him beating the ilk or physique of player he is going to come across at AFL level and without seeming to be outrageously skilled or uber athletic that puts a question mark on whether he can be a dominant AFL figurehead forward, remembering that when most Demonlanders were waxing lyrical about Jack Watts dominating an under 18 game, he was playing on Brad Sheppard with a 10cm and 12kg physical advantage. Watts I think was a good player, but these concepts are behind the reason I think he is at Pick 19 in a draft incredibly bereft of his type of player and not in the top half dozen picks. I think its a good list management pick from a positional list build viewpoint and you are 100% he comes into a great situation for himself at the Dees (most, it has to be said, will, given we have a very balanced list) and I think he could be a good player, maybe a Nick Larkey type, but unlike someone like the patronising and condescending Spirit Of Norm Smith, I'm not going to guess and shamelessly make constantly wrong and grandiose statements or inflated comparisons and bombard the site with drivel. Rather am just providing what I pray to be a balanced, honest assessment. I hope he is the second coming of Neita, but at this stage Im only happy to concede that he is at least going to be a handy structural spine player. Its a great pick by you to identify him as the man we were going to take and I think its going to be interesting for you to compare him and Andrew going forward, because their careers are going to be kind of the lab study of your thesis about Andrew and youve got a very good chance to be proven right. but I need to see him beating good players to be confident. Josh Schache was routinely murdered by Jacob Weitering in his draft year and Van Rooyen hasn't played on someone like that. I need to see either optics of dominance or class, or to see him beating quality players first to be confident. AFL comparison: Harry Petty or could be a Nick Larkey, whichever way you swing.

Unfortunately much of Van Rooyen's best forward work at WAFL colts level is not on freely available game tape, but he was dominant in multiple matches against mostly mediocre opponents. Most of his high-profile and watchable footage was played in key defence where, stylistically and in terms of trait, he is very reminiscent of Harry Petty - steady overhead, big wingspan and an effort player. It sounds like the club view him more as a key forward, where he projects to be more of a solid structural piece than a star, which is the question on him and why he is down at pick 19 - does he have the class and or athletic specialness to be a dominant AFL level key forward? I was surprised given the dearth of key position options that he was available at this pick. Think it's a sound list management pick but not necessarily a sexy decision. If he fails or is ineffective as forward, should at worst make it as a second or third key back.

Dazzle is ther any word re: interest in Brown from Sydney, who widely mocked to take him and there are rumours of them meeting with his management quite fervently.

Nah gawn, jetta, Howe and t mcdonald doesnt quite have him in the deadsite imbecile category, the category of someone who never gets things right :)

If thats the case, one complication with executing that plan is that a package of our first two picks wouldnt be if much value to the Giants as the second pick would be swallowed matching a bid for Josh Fahey, they just dont get any benefit unless they can quickly trade it for something futuristic. Otherwise there is just nothing in it for the Giants to the naked eye.

I wouldnt be concerned if I was Chesser, Doerre is the second worst judge of football talent who regularly comments on the subject!

They could also trade down get some future material and then trade back in after Fahey has gone, a more convoluted way of getting to your original plan.

GWS have a problem in that there is no real advantage for them trading down as any pick in the 30s for example would be inefficiently consumed matching a bid for Josh Fahey. It would make more sense for them to trade down and get a future pick as the benefit, which rules us out. St Kilda are another team that could benefit from a trade down, but they are hamstrung for the same reason.

I think the Woewodin bid question isnt as important as they suggest because so many picks in the likely range are owned by Collingwood and the Dogs and will disappear, which means the impact to Melbourne is minimised from the bid itself and there is less opportunity for clubs to bid in any case. The chance of us being negatively effected by a bid is very minimal I think.

George Haines is probably the most conspicuous German Dee of all time and should be in the team!

I know there were some murmurings at the club that Jimmy’s boy Tiernan was also worth tracking.

No, because of the uncertainty of the Covid situation back then, the AFL put in a rule that clubs could move players to the rookie list from the senior list. That rule has since been removed.

Hopefully, the kid never read it! 🙏

Have you recalibrated where youre expecting Cody Raak, Kobi George and Max Pescud to go?

Do you mean Scott Turner or Steve Turner?

It is with great trepidation that I reply to an acolyte from the Spirit of Norm Smith tree of influence after Mitch O’Neill won South Adelaide’s best first year player award this year, but I will try and help you out. Firstly, there are some incorrect facts in your post. Josh Honey was a second year rookie this year and Cottrell was also a rookie (rendering obsolete your complaint about Carlton’s use of him.) There are some list and TPP mechanics that are relevant but arent referred to in your diatribe. One of the most important is that rookie promotions count towards the AFL’s mandated minimum three national draft picks per club. So by switching players from the relative ‘lists’, it helps clubs satisfy that requirement. In the current AFL world where list sizes are incredibly tight that has a value. Carlton are positioned to have only one National draft pick, perhaps two, this year, so they’ve covered the AFL’s draft requirements with the rookie promotions. We can now move to TPP. To recontract O’Brien they would have to pay the AFL senior list minimum at worst, now they can pay him the rookie list minimum, a saving of at least $30k in actual real dollars. The movement of Kennedy is a counterweight to any TPP benefit most likely but its still a positive financial result for the club. The actual rookie list TPP saving maximum is closer to 100k than the 60k from your post. So the O'Brien for Kennedy switch has at least a real world money saving benefit, plus it has extremely positive list size and national draft implications. In terms of Honey, the National Draft pick factor is relevant, plus Carlton had a huge rookie list last yeat with high retention into this year, so promoting him helps with that, given that the AFL tightened the rookie list screws with its latest list size announcement this year. Him moving to the primary opens the extra slot for one of the delisted players. Im not sure but as a third year supplemental rookie draft player, Cottrell may have reached the ceiling to the amount of time he could stay as a rookie, they may have been forced to either delist or promote. If thats the the case, the former is a more sensible line of attack. The moves are about satisfying AFL rules and dealing with list size issues.

There should be one, but thats the thing, theres never been a list come out in years past that I can remember.