RalphiusMaximus

Happy New Year to all the Demonlanders.  Whether I agree with you or not I respect the hell out of every single one of you for the dedication and loyalty you show the club through so many hard times.  Let's hope that 2020 is the year the curse is finally broken and we see a long overdue flag. 

At least this time they're only changing some administration-type things.  Maybe they've finally gotten the message to stop messing with the game itself. 

2 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

He is progressing nicely, had a bit of calf issue but is now back full training, has good hands, neat kicking skills, of course like Jackson, gets knocked around by Gawn and Preuss when doing ruck drills

Was working 1 on 1 with Stafford the other day on his goal kicking, didn't miss one

Important bit is, he loves being a footy player, always smiling, think he can't believe his luck, playing for the club he supports, like Harmes

If he works as hard as Harmes did then he'll get there.  It would be amazing if he got to that level. 

2 hours ago, Deemania since 56 said:

These stats are interesting and the differentials are most annoying in first analysis. Care is given to certain teams and the majority of teams make up their rewards. This has little to do with the even playing field that umpiring should be providing.

It must also be considered that it is not just the number of free kicks that are (nowadays) traditionally awarded and/not awarded in the realm of such 'officiating' care; it is more important to analyse those frees that:

• make or break the winning of a game for a particular team in 'care' (for example, where and when the free kick was awarded) 
• and did it/ did it not affect the outcome of the game as a result - ie: assured winners/assured losers
• or even, force a team to lose a game or to provide 'eveners' between the sides to enhance the 'spectacle' from the AFL points of view?

This is not cynical; this is a feature of our game these days.

Also the frees that should have been paid but weren't.  Those can have just as great an impact on results and how the game is played.  Imagine how different the game would be today is Scott West was called for throwing the ball. 

Petracca wins his first B&F.

KK retires before the end of the year. 

Dees make Semi-Final.

In other news:

The Saints make finals but bomb in the first round - They have recruited a bunch of B+ types but lack real quality and there's only so much The Rat can do. 

Adelaide have a horror year.

Age wearies the Pies.

Fremantle culture problems worsen. 

Geelong go downhill as their aging core players fail to maintain their previous levels. 

12 hours ago, drdrake said:

The coach, he designed the ball to help with ball drop.  To change players at this age ball drop and action is extremely difficult and really shouldn't be something an AFL club should need to do

There's a #1 pick over in the NBA right now who is renowned for his inability to shoot... 

5 hours ago, Tarax Club said:

Absolutely agree Flash cannot readily think of a Demons example,

Max Gawn did it over two seasons.  His set shots have improved out of sight. 

Richmond did it with their whole squad not that long ago.  They identified low trajectory passing as a skill that successful teams had and made a concerted effort to teach the technique to their entire squad, resulting in improved accuracy and ball movement. 

I for one am 100% in favour of using the funny-looking balls.  Who cares if they are meant for kids?  If they help improve kicking then they're worth having. 

7 hours ago, drdrake said:

Can't believe an AFL club is using the Mark Williams Ball, this is the one with the yellow line up the middle to teach kids how to drop the ball correctly

IF it works I'm all for it. 

Out of curiosity is this the coach or the guy who played for Hawthorn?  If the latter, he was a bloody good kick, so there could well be something in it.   

I've given us a B- for the draft.  While I didn't want us to go that direction, I accept that Jackson is a legitimate pick at three, so can't fault that one.  Rivers was by all reports a bit of a steal, so big points for that.  I have to take points off for Pickett though.  At that pick we had access to other much better-credentialed players (Kemp) and went in with blinkers on intending to target only one player. 

Looking at the draft/trade period as a whole I think we're an easy A+.  The club chased three players through trade and FA and landed them all, then traded themselves into a position to get the two young talents they had targeted and picked them both up with the picks they brought in specifically for that purpose as well as picking up a bonus AA HB.  Taken as a whole it was a flawlessly executed plan that has so far been 100% successful. 

Further to that, despite my repeated insistence that we'd be better off with Young and Kemp, I can't fault them on the choices they've made given that I was also very vocal in pointing out our habit of drafting safe players with great character and leadership but no x-factor or ability to turn games on their own.  We've certainly smashed that image this year.  Jackson, Pickett and Bennell are all in the risky but with a massive reward if they come off category.  If all three come off we'll be in for some very interesting times. 

I can safely say that in a team completely devoid of willingness to work off the ball for each other, his liking for bumps and shepherds will be a standout trait. 

Reading that just makes it hurt more that we didn't take young. 

11 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

Spoke to a contact last night and he gave me the below top 15. The ones in brackets are known amongst the industry as pretty much 100% going to happen. Not sure where the Green bid is going to come, but it appears to have dropped right down to around Carlton/Melbournes second pick for whatever reason. Absolute joke that GWS will get him so cheap!

GC - Rowell (confirmed)
GC - Anderson (confirmed)
Melb - Jackson (confirmed)
GWS - Ash
Syd - Flanders
Ade - McAsey
Freo - Young (confirmed)
Freo - Serong (confirmed)
Freo - Henry (match Carltons bid)
Carl - Stephens
Melb - Pickett
Haw - Kemp
Port - Berman
Dogs - Weightman

That's damn impressive.  Right on almost all counts up to our second pick, including the bids on Henry and Green. 

I have no doubt that he can play.  His highlights make him look like a mad scientist got hold of NicNat and Grundy's DNA and hybridised them.  Whether that's a realistic representation of his abilities I guess we'll find out.  I still think we should have gone with Young, but I've been harping on for months about the club not taking risks and chasing guys who could have a massive payoff, so I really can't complain. 

Either way, he's in the Red and Blue so I hope he absolutely kills it at AFL level and becomes a champion of our club. 

So I guess we can look at this two ways. 

If you go solely on the value of the pick and who we could have picked up then you have to be pretty annoyed that we overlooked a bunch of seriously talented players who will probably turn out to be a lot better. 

If you look at it as part of the whole draft/trade period and the package we have gotten as a whole then we've filled our need for running wingers, picked up a talented small forward to replace Garlett and a 2m forward/ruck to develop who will probably see game time next year.  Plus an option on Bennell and Brown if they look good in training.  You'd have to call that a good haul. 

I just hope we can all keep looking at it this way when Kemp is accepting his Brownlow... 

27 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

like Nev Jetta?

Apples and Oranges.  Nev was a low pick who really struggled to find a place in the AFL.  Jackson is sought-after and would be welcome at any club in the league.  The WA clubs are no doubt already in his ear about moving home in two years if he's grabbed by anyone else.  He may not plan to do it, but I don't think there's any doubt that they will be pressuring him to do it. 

On 11/21/2019 at 2:38 PM, dazzledavey36 said:

He's nothing like Elliot Yeo. 

Both topped the agility test. I thing that's where the comparison is coming from.

Honestly, I'm not concerned with his ability on the field. I have two issues with this kid. 

1. Another ruck isn't a big priority right now.
2. Chances are he'll do a Hogan and run for home the moment he has any currency.

Given he's not a clear standout over others I would prefer us taking a local kid with great skills and movement.

26 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

3. Anderson.

10. Kemp.

28. Gould. 

#ETthedraftwhisperer. #Whatdoesheknow? 

Bold. 

Missing a year as an 18 year old is nothing. It just means he gets a proper grounding in our game and builds his body up before he plays. It's what shouls happen with all new draftees.

I think Jackson at three. Trade 10 for either two picks in the teens or one and a first round next year. They'll go one of the small forward types with the teen pick. Pickett most likely if he's  still there.

What i'd like to see in a perfect world is:

• Bid on Green, forcing GWS to take him early and booting them out of two drafts.
• Grab Young with our (now) pick 4
• Kemp at 11(formerly 10)
• Small forward with our second round pick.

Just now, Rusty Nails said:

Would rather Schoenburg than Serong.  Probably the most under rated mid in the draft.  Serong a solid accumulator but disposal isn't the best.

Wouldn't that fit in beautifully with our side?

On a side-note, if my calculations are correct that means we won't be using our PSD pick... 

1 minute ago, DeeSpencer said:

That's my problem with this deal. If it was done on draft night I'd be all for it because we'd know exactly who's gone in the top 7 and who's left at 8/9/10.

The club must be very confident of their research and rankings.

That and doing a favour to Fremantle for no real reason... 

2 minutes ago, JTR said:

I don't get the some of the angst.

We still have two selections in the top 10

I'd imagine who we want at 8 will.probably still be there at 10

We've upgraded our third selection from 97 > 28

?

Once upon a time we wanted Tom Lynch with our pick 12.  He went at pick 11.  We took Lucas Cook instead. 

Dropping two spots can be a monumentally painful thing to do if the picks don't go our way. 

I just don't see much benefit in this deal.  We drop two spots, potentially miss a player we really want (Kemp) for pick 28 which is basically a crap-shoot.  It's not like we need it for points to spend on an academy kid.  Given how few spots we have available I just don't see the benefit here. 

2 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Dear Gonzo, I got up to ask 2 questions, some of the questions were excellent, so were the answers

What were they?

Did anyone raise our delivery into the forward 50 and whether the bomb to the hot spot was a coaching directive or something the players were doing for lack of other options?