Adam The God

I agree with the essence of this post, but Jesse's trade value would be two top 10 picks. You seem to be suggesting he'd only be worth one first rounder in line with Lever. However, CHF is a position a lot harder to fill than CHB, if that's even the position we're saying Lever occupies. Reckon it's a moot point as Jesse will stay IMO, but if he does decide to leave, I'm comfortable knowing our FD would ensure we'd be adequately compensated.

Secured all the finance for my new film and trade week starts tomorrow. Life is good! ???

Essendon's young midfield is seriously impressive. They probably lack a bit of depth like we do, but I reckon they'll be pushing top 4 next year.

If you could get him for a second rounder and convince him to come across it's a no brainer.

Surely we're aiming higher?

Neither particularly compliments our midfield. I'd take Libba first before Hannebery, but would prefer a pacey, good ball user or a contested beast that is a ball magnet (think Ollie Wines). Libba doesn't get it enough and Hannebery is appeared (to me) to be slowing down this year (not to mention being Sydney-based). Who else could it be? Out of the Victorian based teams and midfielders (outside of the Essendon youngsters that I've mentioned), I'd only be interested in Cripps (injury doubts), Treloar, Sidebottom (maybe), Jack Steven, Bontempelli, Dahlhaus, Macrae (although is he tough enough?) and Daniel.

I hope it's one of the young Essendon mids. McGrath, Parish, Merrett (yes, I know he's captain). I can't imagine they'd put any of them on the table, but if they did and we somehow gathered enough currency to pay them (without jeopardising our list), these guys would be perfect with their outside speed and ball use and in the perfect age demographic.

You haven't got many wrong, mate. Winning. ??? Thanks for the info.

Disagree. It's all about space and forwardline synergy IMO. Tom looked terrific against Adelaide playing high HF and rotating back to the square. I think he could play it and run his opponent off their feet. I never thought I would say I'm excited about Tom McDonald, but I am excited about Tom McDonald the forward and what he can bring to our forwardline in partnership with Hogan. For me, his move forward is somewhat of a masterstroke and was one of many moves Goodwin and co made this year, when faced with adversity, that came up trumps and made us better. Tom and Jesse are both really good below their knees and I'd back both to be able to rotate high HF, CHF and deep. Give Tom space and I'd back him to win most one-on-ones. Really like the versatility that Goodwin has demanded from his players. And that brings me to Jack. He's certainly added (positional) strings to his game, but has failed to add (intensity and physicality) strings to his game and this was always ultimately going to bring his exit at the MFC.

Great response from the club. Obviously, it's a generic email that they have from the PR department, but on point.

Wow, mate. Are you serious? I'm sorry, but no one player is bigger than the club.

No need, mate. Demonland's his Bible.

What problems? Record membership, continued upward trajectory on and off field. This thread belongs on a small stage in an empty pub at the Melbourne Fringe. This is a trollathon.

Can't really believe we're putting someone like Smith in the same sentence as Lever. Smith looked out of his depth for almost every minute this year, despite the huge wraps on him coming into the season. I'm not saying he won't make it, but he's got a long way to go to even show he's a reliable defender, let alone a potential star. Lever has shown that however...

Precisely.

Rance has played years on the 2nd and 3rd tall and really only in the last two or so years has he been able to compete with the big boys physically. Initially, he was all about third man upping and to a degree still is, as we saw with Hogan beating him up in 2015, he's best as a third up defender. But the way the game is played these days, there are no stringent positions and players rotate across multiple areas of the ground and opponents. Point is, the comparison is completely valid.

Let's just say these rumours are true and we could convince Wines to come back to Victoria, would people do Watts and our 2017 or 2018 first rounder for Wines? To me it's not a lay down misere as Wines offers us something that we already have, but there is no doubting his quality. Is a midfield of Viney, Wines, Oliver and Petracca better than a midfield of Viney, Gaff, Oliver and Petracca? You suspect the shear ball winning ability of the former would be too strong for most midfields, so I'd probably go with the less balanced former group.

It’ll be interesting to see what team's cherry pick from Richmond’s blueprint this year. I suspect the modern press has been shown to be more effective with a mosquito fleet, rather than being more reliant on KPFs to take marks for you. But it's hard to know whether this is simply because Adelaide was so poor on the most important day or whether the Richmond game style is more sustainable with a smaller team. The Richmond game plan is certainly incredibly simple, but executed in impressive fashion for much of this year. What is perhaps the most interesting question is whether teams decide to focus on combating the modern press or whether they try and change the game by implementing another plan that renders the press inoperable. If it’s to emulate the Richmond mosquito fleet, in an MFC context, I don’t think we can play the three talls of Tom McDonald, Pedersen and Hogan in the same forward line. But given McDonald’s versatility, I think it’d be Pedersen that would miss out and we'd go with two talls (no Watts). So if we decide to emulate the Richmond press, we’ll play multiple smalls (Garlett, Johnstone?, Kent?, JKH?) in the one side to support Hogan, McDonald and Petracca. Tyson may well be in trouble here given his lack of footspeed when not playing in the middle. I don’t know what the alternative is because I’m not on our coaching staff, but I suspect guys like Jennings will have watched very carefully today and seen how the Richmond pressure stood up on the big day, and we’ll look to cherry pick what we liked out of it. I think our press worked against Richmond for much of the match until our injuries took their toll, so we may well back our own system to beat them and merely tweak our own system and add Lever to our defensive set up. What is clear though is that we are a slow football team and we need more pace. Particularly, forward of centre. We’ve addressed much of our lack of pace off half back with Frost, Hunt and Hibberd, but outside of Garlett, who else do we have that’s competitive and quick? Don’t say Dean Kent. And JKH is too slow. Johnstone is too young and probably hasn’t shown enough. Who we decide to target on the recruiting front this off season, will be truly fascinating and will suggest a lot about where our FD thinks our list is at, as well as what they think we need to win games next year. In terms of trading aggressively, outside of Lever, most of us have said for a while we need a player of Gaff's abilities. I'd also target some quick, mercurial smalls that can implement the press, help out Hogan and McDonald at ground level and offer dangerous, zippy forward options to compliment Garlett. I'd put Watts up for trade in an attempt to get Lever, Gaff and a natural small forward like Rioli. The price is Watts, our 2017 first rounder and our 2018 first rounder. Given the shallowness of our midfield and our need for reinforcements in this area of the ground, if we put Tyson or Salem up for trade, that tells me we're changing direction slightly in a list strategy sense and probably going with a blueprint closer to Richmond's. It all comes down to where our FD sees the game going in the next 3-5 years. That's where the real skill lies. Being able to predict the evolution of the game or changing it yourself by revolutionising the game with a new game style (ie the forward press, Clarko's cluster etc). Let's hope Goodwin and co are up to it and I'd agree the time is now to trade aggressively.

Thought Kelly was very, very fumbly. Was okay in a few contests, but doesn't have the poise of Lever. The Adelaide defence will really struggle without Lever. If Talia goes down they're in big trouble.

Disagree. You completely underestimate the importance of an intercept marker in the modern game. At 21 years of age, he will become like Rance, who himself didn't click until 25ish. When you take into account Melbourne's midfield of Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Jones (who in time) will be better than BCrouch, MCrouch, Sloane et al, he'll be an even better player. Rance didn't get a lot of it today, but I'd make a strong case for him being worthy of the Norm Smith (as much as I hate him). Any time they kicked it near him, Richmond were able to neutralise the contest at worst and any other time, wherever Rance positioned himself meant that Richmond's defence was dictating where Adelaide could kick the ball. Rance's ability to intercept meant that Adelaide had to keep it away from him (and therefore dangerous areas for them to attack) and they were unable to do so. In short, a player of Lever's calibre can win or lose you a game. Exhibit A today's Grand Final. Exhibit B our game against Adelaide in Adelaide (Adelaide were minus Lever and it played a big part).

So the dust up between Stringer and Boyd seems to have gone quiet...

Just yuck, mate. Hope not. I'd trade Jack Watts, but only if it landed/helped land a B+/A grade mid in that 23-25 age bracket.

I'm not sure how long Cameron should be given the keys to a Rolls Royce if he's going to keep crashing it every year. Don't give me injury lists. They still have more first round picks in their 22 than most (if not all) sides. If I were the GWS hierarchy, I'd be looking to poach the very best. Someone like Clarkson.

Carlton the new GWS and Collingwood the new Melbourne if Watts and Weid end up there.

I don't think the Crows defence will fall apart without Lever, but I think you're underestimating how important Lever is, mate.