Fat Tony

Thinking about this some more, adding a forward who can fit alongside Weideman and Jackson is key. Cameron would obviously fit because he is a superstar and very mobile. De Goey would be the best pick up, legal issues aside. Gunston would cost our 2021 first rounder and more, which is a lot for a 28 year old. Mihocek would also be able to play alongside Weideman and Jackson. Ben Brown would probably make us too slow and top heavy but would cost the least. Daniher is hit or miss and seems to want to get out of Melbourne. The other option could be to swing May forward and play Petracca 70% forward. We could then go for a key defender like Robbie Tarrant, Hooker or Carlisle.

This is not a year to be doing a massive list cull. We have no first round pick, the draft is heavily compromised and will be a chook raffle given no junior footy. We would be better to go with minimum wage one-year deals on current players or DFA than lock ourselves in to two year deals from the draft.

Pretty much bang on. We don't necessarily need a KPF. A very good small or mid sized forward would also improve our side. And I must be less confident in Baker than you. I know he did ok on the weekend, but he is 22. I just don't see him ever really making it. (Hope I am wrong.)

It is interesting to see who is after Cameron. The Pies could do with a KPF but wouldn't seem to have the cap space with Moore, De Goey and Mihocek out of contract and Grundy on a monster deal. The Tigers, Dockers, PA and Blues don't need a KPF. The Bombers are trying to keep Daniher but could target him if he leaves. The Dogs are getting a young gun KPF in the draft and have Naughton and Bruce is on big money. The Crows, NM and Hawks are rebuilding and would not be that attractive to Cameron. The Eagles might want a replacement for Kennedy, but surely they haven't got the cap space with Nic Nat, McGovern and Kelly on big money. I can't believe the Cats have the cap room either. The Saints seem to be locked in to building around King and probably want to focus on the midfield. The Swans, Lions, GCS and Dees would be the most likely external bidders.

Saad is rated around 50th in the competition this year according to AFL player ratings. He would add speed and skill to our side, which we need both of. A second round pick in this draft would be a great result.

It looks ok because we drafted well and have won enough games this year (with no injuries). Just because you win at blackjack doesn't mean you are a good player.

I agree, it is highly preferable that any forward that we recruit compliments Jackson and Weideman. We also don't know if Petty (uncontracted) will play again or if TMac (unlikely) can rediscover form. Of the list I gave, Gunston, Breust or De Goey would seem to be the best fits for us - adding class and maintaining forward pressure. And, I also agree that we should definitely be looking to add mid and small forwards in the draft. However, Cameron is one of the top 25 players in the game. If we have any chance to get him, we should take it IMO.

Doc, I agree that Cameron at $1.2m might not be the best value recruit - even though he is a free agent. But I still think a gun forward is something we lack and that, from a list management perspective, it will be the simplest way for us to improve. (We need to dangle a few lines out and see if we get any bites.) And Weideman will be a better player with another top player around him. Our midfield needs to improve as well, but I think that needs to happen organically. Oliver, Viney, Brayshaw, Petracca, Harmes, Sparrow and Langdon collectively need to improve their disposal. But I don't think we have room in the rotation to add another recruit in the centre square.

While I understand where you are coming from, I disagree with this. We have two major problems. A weak forward line and a poorly skilled midfield. Fixing the skill of midfield is not going to be easy, as our best players are also our biggest culprits. And they cannot play anywhere else. I think a gun forward and another wingman are the players we should target this off season. Cameron, Daniher, Mihocek, Gunston, Brown, Breust and De Goey are all players we should be trying to get.

I wish our players had a little more Mumford in them.

Smith may be 32 but he looks like a player that could have a very long career IMO. Would be a great get.

Also going down the middle often makes it easier to find a loose player on the wings occasionally

6,6,6 rule requires one in the square. If you take a mark in the square the angle of the kick is straight in front. Also, the square is a starting point for where you need to be before a kick in.

Salary cap

Pies have just signed Grundy on a mega deal and have De Goey and Moore out of contract. We should chase Mihocek, De Goey and Moore, as the Pies can probably only afford two.

Definitely a player we should target. Tough, good mark and kicks straight. Applies pressure too. I like Gunston more, but Mihocek is out of contract and this is his chance to set himself up financially.

If we are going to change, Clarkson would be the top pick. Otherwise I think Brad Scott is a shrewd coach.

Toby Bedford has no clear AFL qualities that I can see.

I know that there’s bigger issues, but whoever decided to give Oscar Baker a 2 year deal has no idea.

I don't have pressure gauge stats, but the other defensive stats paint a different picture. In terms of total Pressure Acts, we had 277 vs the Bulldogs and only 175 vs the Saints. For tackles, we had 46 vs the Bulldogs and just 36 vs the Saints. And for context, against the Cats we had 242 total Pressure Acts and 47 tackles. Against the Tigers we had 261 total Pressure Acts and 45 tackles. My point stands that the conditions, ground size and game style/tempo of the opposition will influence the pressure gauge ratings and that a high pressure gauge is not always equal to good defence.

The pressure gauge can be a bit misleading IMO as the style of ball movement of the team in possession influences the rating. When opposed to a kicking team, the defending team will tend to have lower pressure rating than we they are facing a handballing team. I am sure our pressure rating against St Kilda was very low, although we defended really well by covering space. Conversely, it would have been high against the Bulldogs, who are a handballing team, although we defended poorly.

I stand corrected on the Sydney game. However, I would strongly argue that the work rate issues to do with Port and Sydney games were largely due to the short turnarounds. As you know, I have been strong that the coaches haven't made enough changes in the compressed fixtures. I still maintain this is nothing to do with culture and DNA, noting that lot of other sides have had some shockers after short turnarounds.

I’m glad the coaches have finally realised we needed a large number of changes with the short breaks. Our game plan is so heavily dependent on pressure and intensity. Interesting that Lockhart was left out again. I would love to know if there is some undisclosed reason. I would have picked TMac this week instead of Preuss but that’s not going to be the deciding factor. Oliver will tag Fyfe if he plays in the midfield. Otherwise Smith will get him.

This is just spin by media commentators. Our success of failure as a club will not be determined by our 'DNA'. It will be determined by making good decisions in terms of selecting coaches, recruiting players and allocating contracts. And then we will need a healthy dose of luck to win premierships. Our losses, apart from the Port game, have been almost solely due to a lack of skill. Not softness. If we continue to confuse the reasons why we are where we are and think it is 'culture', we could end up with Mark Neeld 2.0.

Martin had a quiet night with only 11 possessions, but he went at 72% efficiency. Yesterday Petracca and Oliver were prolific but both went at just over 50%. My point is that it’s the turnovers that kill us, because when they happen all our players are running hard forward. Martin’s bad games are about not winning the ball, not poor skill. In their bad games, our players still win the ball but they then give it up, which is worse.