praha

We're reaching the point now where consistently good football (not necessarily wins every week) should be the bare minimum KPI. <50 games with at least 1 game in 2015: Hogan Viney Toumpas Salem Brayshaw Gawn Stretch Kent Frost Newton Michie JKH McDonald ANB White 50-99 games Trengove Tyson McDonald Grimes (still has a place imo) Jetta Then we have a very small group in the 100-150 range Dawes Garland Garlett Howe By 2017, a lot of that first group will be closing in on 50 games, and that second group on 100-150. A majority of our players will be in that bracket. That is exactly what you need to be a finals side. We currently have a massive gap in the 100-200 range that I think is reflective in how badly we drop off between our best and worst. When you think about that, the future is actually very exciting. I suspect that 2016 could still be a slog fest, the team still trying to find its feet. Finals isn't a KPI, it's a goal, something to aim for, but by no means a minimum requirement. Let's not set ourselves up for disappointment. Consistent football is what they should be eying down more than anything, and if finals come out of that, bonus! By 2017, finals will be a bare minimum KPI. Goodwin is going to walk into what will probably be one of the most balanced sides in the comp.

I do think Hogan is more deserving but I suspect the voters will have banded together to orchestrate a tie if there is one. I wouldn't be disappointing. I can't imagine Cripps winning it over Hogan. That would be outrageous. As much as the game has changed over the past 5, 10, 15, 20 years, going back to the Lockett, Dunstall, Ablett years, fans and pundits still respect a good, consistent key forward. I can't see how you could possibly give Cripps more votes ahead of Hogan if you have at the very least a novice understanding of the game.

2x wins against the Saints, Queen's Birthday, Carlton, Essendon...all games we *should* have won. That would have put us at 12 wins. I predict 10 wins for next year, but 12-15 wins is a possibility if this team can play consistent football. We are miles ahead of Carlton, Essendon, Collingwood, Brisbane, GC, St Kilda, Cats as far as recruiting, drafting and young talent goes. IMO anyway.

Most frustrating is that we bleed goals mostly through either lack of effort, or just poor turnovers under minimal pressure. Dropped uncontested marks, fluffed handballs in the back half, hospital handpasses, poor kicks to players under pressure. When on, we're very good, but when off, as Roos notes, our worst is still as bad as it's ever been. That gap suggests it's in the mind, just a lack of awareness and a breakdown of team fundamentals and dynamics.

He was okay. Good in patches, never terrible. Obviously seemed dogged by injury. I actually forgot about him for a bit there. Gee whiz. Tyson, Petracca, Brayshaw, Viney. If that isn't one of if not the best young midfield core in the league, I don't know what is. If we can't make the finals in one of the next two years with this crop, this club is unfixable.

Unfortunately while Bernie had a lot of very good patches, he went missing for 3-4 games a time, two or three times. His last four or five games, he was pretty much unsighted except for the last round. Unsurprising. Nathan Jones was far more deserving last year than Vince was this year. That said, Heath Shaw? Over Tom McDonald? Wow.

You also forgot the part where Cameron gets gifted cheap goals by umpires and his teammates. I hate him so.

I have a pretty wild idea, but I'm sure there are some holes in it. 1. Introduce a luxury tax for teams that finish in the 11th-18th range: they can pay more than the salary cap to sign a free agent, and pay a tax on the extra amount, with the tax decreasing the further down the ladder you go. Let's say 75% of the amount over the cap for 11th, and 25% for 18th. So the cap is $10 million. You have $1 million left in your cap, and you sign a free agent to a 3 year, $3.6 million contract. If the contract is back-ended and you don't go over the cap until the third year of the contract, you pay a tax rate reflective of your position that year. If you finish 18th, you're best placed to front-end the contract so that you pay the minimum amount of tax at the earliest point of the contract. In the case of this contract, the 18th-placed team could pay the free agent $2 million in the first year, and $800,000 in the following years as they rise up the ladder. They'd only pay tax on that extra $1 million they pay over the cap in the first year of the contract. 2. If you lose a player via free agency, the band compensation is reflected in a lower tax rate: the higher the salary and lower the position, the lower your luxury tax rate over a specified period (again determined by band). So in Frawley's case, our tax rate falls to, say 5% of the amount of the cap for the following year, maybe over two years if his salary band dictates it. This would entice Melbourne to sign a free agent at a premium price with a front-ended contract over the cap, pay a lower tax rate in the process, and then bring it back down in corresponding years to balance the cap out again. Discuss. *runs and hides*

We were also picked by many to finish last or 17th. I'd argue we exceeded expectations as well. It's just the whole "bad for a decade" narrative that turns people off praising Melbourne. I think people have higher expectations of Melbourne but simply don't trust them, so play it safe and say they'll be down the bottom again.

Wines.

The Saints could be like the Dogs, though. No one saw where they came from. But I think we have a far better crop of youngsters.

Pick 3 wasn't overs for Frawley, though. That's based upon an entirely subjective interpretation of his value, which is only determined by his salary. Salary + finishing position = compensation If those same players were leaving top teams the pick would be higher. So many on here cry about equalisation and this system actually adequately compensates poor teams that lose players with high market value. The only way to determine a player's value is salary. Any other interpretation is merely subjective.

Yes. /thread. Seriously though, Roos has turned around the likes of Garlett, Nick Davis, helped Bazza Hall channel his anger issues. He's the Troubled Player Whisperer. Watts + 2nd rounder for Bennell + third round pick? EDIT: If Watts is off to Richmond, for what I suspect will be a pick in the 30-35 range, could we move on Toumpas + Richmond pick for Bennell? Would GC bite?

Dunn is a better decoy at CHF than Dawes is.

In 1996, we lost to Collingwood by 94 points in Round 2, and then 8 weeks later in Round 10 we beat them by 38.

List lacks Jack Watts.

I was in Las Vegas for work (I swear!) for the Cats game. Got back to the hotel and listened to the last quarter on my computer when I was supposed to be drafting stuff up. To celebrate I went downstairs and played Blackjack for 4 hours along with the free booze. Went into the meeting the next day still gitty as [censored] and even without a plan still nailed the meeting. Absolutely spewing I missed that game. Wouldn't have gone to Geelong but would have loved to watch it. I think back to when we won in Adelaide in 2014, was watching it at Crown and the [censored] Crows supporters there wouldn't shut up the whole game. I loved that feeling. Sad I missed our best win of the year

I'm not counting a Round 1 win as 2 in a row. It needs to be within the same season. Let's not get selective and desperate. We all know consistent foitball over a season is key.

I suspect the return would be in the pick 20-30 rabge. I'd take that.

Grimes' decision making was horrid but he provided great drive and kicked a wonderful goal at a pivotal moment. He's a good club man and depth player. Can't imagine he'd have much value on the marker. He should remain for that reason.

There were some good wins this year but it was still very frustrating. The gap between best and worst is quite shocking. Consistency is the number one goal right now. We can't string together two or more weeks of good football. Also, finishing teams off. We were a 10-goal better side yesterday I thought but we toyed with them. Not so much a bad thing, we got the win. My pass was 8 wins, but I can give extra credit points for breaking so many ugly records (win round 1, beat geelong, win in geelong, beat Collingwood, win at Etihad). Next year I want 10-12 wins, but mostly, consistently good football. That's the next step for this team.

Shocking crowd but it was a strong contingency. If it were at the MCG, 15000-20000 easy. Poor scheduling by the league. Maybe they'll get it through their heads that if they're going to give Melbourne a home game there, do it against another Melbourne team.

Harmes is exciting. Salem all class. Viney a work horse. Stretch is smart. Brayshaw and Hogan are superstar caliber. They make Garland, Grimes, McDonald, Dunn look like amateurs. The source of GWS goals always seem to come moments after one of that brigade of chronic fumblers has the ball. Within 2-4 possessions of them having the ball, GWS score a goal.

Fmd we're getting NOTHING.

Garland, Grimes, Garland are killing us today.