Little Goffy

They'd want Mitch King as part of the deal, and I'm not willing to pay overs.

It would be a good bit of fun if we set up some kind of repeat of the Tyson/Salem/Kelly deal. Trouble is, what does GWS really need, at all, let alone what we have to offer that we'd willingly lose? Who knows, maybe they'll imagine Spencer as the successor to the great Simmonds, Jolly and Martin tradition of Demons rucks blossoming at other clubs.

Just playing Devil's Advocate... but what if Hird was telling the truth, and he really hadn't known about the illegality and scale of the Essendon supplements program, as adminstered by Dank, reporting to Robinson, reporting to Hamilton? What if he had sincerely believed that his admonishments, and request that no further injections be made without Dr Reid's approval, were taken seriously and had established a safe line of reporting? How is it that Hamilton and Corcoran, for example, haven't been drawn and quartered for public entertainment during one of the 'We are Essendon' marches?

Watched a couple of old highlight reels and the 'arrivials lounge' interview with him, and I must say there's more to him than my memory was telling me. He's actually capable of doing a whole lot of good things. He can kick it a long way with an excellent fast low arc. He can snap goals instinctively. He can chase opponents down. He has that energetic attitude of fast thinking and action in chaos, and trying things that aren't regulation. Now, I've sat with Essendon supporters many a time and seen them beat their hands on tables in frustration at Melksham because of the turnovers and the blunders, but I think a lot of that comes down to him actually trying to do something useful. A lot of those same Essendon supporters (back at the time) would spend the rest of the game groaning about handballing in circles at half-back, or tedious switches of play that come to nothing. So, anyone losing the plot now about how there's been a post about Jake Melksham in the Jake Melskham thread?

Something that makes list decisions a bit difficult is that we really have developed a lot of versatility across our small/medium players. It's hard to get a fix on pecking orders when they can be continually changing what they are there to peck! Obvious example being Neal-Bullen, Stretch, Bugg, Salem and Melksham. It's not quite clear exactly where they'll be positioned. If the midfield core group develops smoothly next year, with these five all be fighting (as well as Hunt, Wagner and Lamumba) to compete for the half-back roles? Same thing applies at the other end - Kennedy, Kent, VandenBerg, Petracca could all end up commanding a full-time midfield spot or all be primarily working across half-forward. Add to this versatility the fact that so many of the young players are 'promising but not guaranteed', and the fickleness of youthful form, we could find that over 2017 we have four too many or four too few. The key position deal seems a little more set. Mac, Mac, Frost down back, and Hogan, Weidemann, Watts up forward. Pederson as a swingman 'big utility' who won't be first in line for any one position, but could end up playing most games as the cover for any one of six talls! Dawes, sadly, looks thoroughly surplus to needs now, while down back where covering the risk of missing key position players is more important, both Dunn and Garland have more time left on their contracts, so the situation kind of offers its own answers. It's almost as if the taller the players get, the clearer the situation. Max Gawn must continue to be Max Gawn. Spencer is the absolutely essential backup.

I think if a deal came down to "Hibberd and Melksham for two second-round picks", I'd take it. Hibberd a much more valuable player, both in quality and position. I'd be quite content if it took an earlier second rounder gained through the 'academy points package deal' process to get Hibberd. Let's be honest, our drafting this year and maybe another is about running the turnover for any 'discount gems'. We have depth across midfield, forward line and even tall defenders. Basically, with Hibber adding an extra piece of consistency and class in defence, we're fine for 'ok, AFL-level' players for now. It is going to take a year or two to find out where the real deficiencies are in this young group (other than learning to run in supportive packs... sigh).

If anyone has reached their The Age limit for the month, remember you can just switch to 'incognito mode' (on chrome, or the equivalent on any other browser) and The Age's website wont be able to recognise you. Or you can find their counter cookie in your internet history files and delete it. State. Of. The. Art.

Something funny I noticed when I was looking at the charts in the article about "How Roos finally turned the Demons around". Our current run is our longest stretch of consecutive 'improved seasons' since the 1940s. Win count 1942-46 - 5, 7, 7(%), 8, and finally 13 (and a grand final appearance). The only other run of 4 in a row is 1923-26, going 3,4,12,14 and culminating in a premiership. It gets better for Mr Roos. That 1940s run is shared between Percy Beams and 'Checker' Hughes, who each coached a couple of those season, and the 1920s run is shared between Rattray, Wilson and finally Chadwick. Meaning that Paul Roos holds the Melbourne Football Club record for consecutive seasons of improvement as coach.

Probably keep - Surely Trengove is a keeper? It'd be pretty dumb to hold onto a player through their rehab, give them a few games where they showed they are still competent, and then dump them before they've had a real preseason with the group. Keeping him makes practical sense as well as avoiding that sour feeling. Kennedy-Harris has slowed his development dramatically since his early exciting start, but I'd imagine he's had enough bad luck and shown enough good glimpses to justify another season. Neal-Bullen we'd be mad to delist. Great depth at a low price, and looks constantly on the edge of stepping up and being a serious AFL contributor. No 'risk' or cost involved in keeping him, and there is real chance of a big upside. Pederson. Look below at the first line of the 'exits' - I see four senior players Pederson is ahead of, and stays ahead of given he can cover any of their roles and as a bonus is the only one who can also support in the ruck. He's the most versatile and most reliable of the lot. Probably farewell - Awkward times for Lumumba, Dunn, Garland, Dawes and Grimes. I wouldn't say any of them are out-and-out failures, but they all have limitations (which have driven a few Demonlanders mad... madder) and they have all been overtaken by others. Terlich and Michie are presumably both done at AFL level, despite being quite respectable at Casey. But there's the rub - three years ago both those guys, and all of the players mentioned above, would have been in our starting 22 out of a fully fit list. Newton I'm sad about - I thought he could have been a genuine attacking mid, but he just hasn't ever put it all together. Though he's young enough to be given some more time, I think as a club we're best served by trying a new kid. So, I've got 8 players on the probable exit list. Some might be worth a little bit in trade, at least enough to do a shuffle of academy cash-in picks which might get us one pick late in the first round. I like the idea of 'high-low' in drafts; early to get something we need, late for turnover of bottom-price 'possibles'. Scanning the draft prospect list, it seems there's two 'suitable for needs' tall half-backs, Witherden and Rotham, both tipped for late in the first round. Several of those likely to leave will be on decent pay, so our salary cap will open up a bit, to either secure the players we need to keep or to grab a loose player that fits our needs. The rest can be a collection of late draft 'interesting' picks for McCartney to see what he can do with. We'll go into the 2017 season with a deep midfield, a variety of talls both forward and back, more speed than we've had in many many years, and the game's best ruckman. Touch wood.

Progressing nicely, could become my favourite type of AFL player - a reliable best-22 quality who gets the job done and doesn't often stuff the whole thing up. May we see 200+ underrated games from the kid.

That game was a mad crazy party for kids. 18 - Oliver 19 - Stretch 20 - Petracca, Harmes 21 - Hunt, Hogan, Wagner 22 - Viney, Kennedy, Tyson, Kent. Eleven players on the field under 23 years old. And meanwhile, waiting injured, there's Salem, Brayshaw, ANB, O.Mac and the draftees. It doesn't mean a dynasty is starting, it doesn't mean all our problems are solved, I'm not getting ahead of myself, the lid is on, some of these kids wont sustain the standard long term, we're still getting a huge contribution from veterans like Jones and Vince, Pederson and... Garland? Lumumba?

If you want reasonably credible rankings for player from just this year, there's a few options to consider. Inside Football's http://www.aflplayerratings.com.au/ The coaches association votes appear on the AFL website after every round. You can also just run with champion data, and sort by supercoach points by position (probably easiest using footywire) None are ideal, but all are better than the 'Official AFL Player ratings brought to you by schmuck'

Lynch-Hogan could be quite the shootout, the way the Suns and ourselves are defending against marking talls lately.

Max Gawn circa 1500BC

Top effort Rance, fail to compete, drop an elbow into the back of someone's head while they are lying on the ground, and then take a dive as soon as anyone gives you a shove. You're written off, pretty boy. You'll never get those three seconds back.

Wow, here's a shocker. The only player* on our current list to have ever had a positive win/loss balance at Melbourne is Lynden Dunn, after playing in most of Melbourne's hot streak in 2006. Dunn's balance went below 50/50 in round 15, 2007. *with at least 10 games experience.

Last time we went a season without a 15 goal (90pt) or greater loss was 2010. Last time we went a season without a game where an opponent doubled our score was 2006! Also since 2006 - the deepest into a season that we've been a) in the 8, and b) had a percentage >100 would be round 7, 2011. There are some worthy targets for the season.

Clearly his poor form to start the season has been synchronised with Fremantle's poor form. His psyche is already there. Frankly I wish Ross Lyon would coach him a bit better, he's ruining his development. I still think it is most likely that Hogan is staying, and I still think he's going to be a gun, and I still think the wailing from the likes of Lloyd (who had just one really good game in his second season, by the way) is a really impressive storm in a teacup. Still, a bit of poor form might take 100k off his next contract, all good.

People worry too much and get too morose about these things. Hogan and Watts are at the very least in a wonderful bromance, and putting contract talks off might just mean they are waiting for the plebiscite to go through. "Gathered here today in the sight of light tower 4, we commit ourselves to a profoundly extended contract" "You may now contest the mark"

I should clarify - I still wouldn't support paying Hogan 1.5mil under any circumstance. We can only hope that these kids are vaguely sensible about money and will be 'content' with 10-year 750k deals that mean neither they nor any family member has to worry about money ever again. I think all negotiations for AFL player (and coach) contracts should be required to be voiced in 'number of ordinary full time wage rates'*. As in "Contract negotiations are progressing well, with the key sticking point being whether the player is worth 13 full-time-wage-equivalents or closer to 17 full-time-wage-equivalents." And "Sylvia, who failed to play a game and 'retired' prior to the start of the season due to poor preparation, breaches of team rules and lack of effort in training, will immediately be paid out his salary of 8 full-time-wage-equivalents." * I prefer median wage as a representation of 'ordinary wage', as average is heavily skewed by the peak at the top end of the bell-curve.

Except for Cameron McCarthy. Who can get as antsy and worked up and annoyed about crappy Sydney summer weather and homesick for the Fremantle doctor as much as he likes. Problem solved.

Yeah, it's a bizarre claim from Schwarz. Hogan is frankly stellar and while i share the notion that 1.5m a year starts to look unbalancing on the list, if there's any player worth it it is Hogan. But Hogan is also taking a risk... what if by halfway through this season Weidemann has cleared his injury legacy, developed the fitness and is out and about providing a credible alternative? Would knock 250k off Hogan's maximum value. Of course, I think really Hogan would just be delighted to have a strong partner up forward and the two of them could settle into becoming the game's best combo. Remember the quotes pre-draft; "When Weideman went under the knife he was rated a top-three prospect on the rise — and little has changed."

We're really having this conversation, again? Mitchell, Gaff, Prestia, Hannebery, Murphy, Steven, Jones, Adams, Hill, Wingard, Shiel, Montagna, Coniglio and Viney. The quickest way to assemble a list of 'undersized' midfielders is to look at the Brownlow Medal count. I'm not saying that being shorter makes someone a better player, but if you're imagining that being around 180cm makes you inadequate for the midfield, you're a mile off the mark. As for Clayton Oliver, I'm warming to him solely on his resemblance to Brienne of Tarth. I say these things to remind myself that I (and most of everyone else) have no idea what the detailed merits of each player are, and will trust pilot to fly the plane. My preference list for the 3/7 combo is still some arrangement of Francis/Parish/Weideman.

Some people add muscle much more easily than others, some people retain fast-reacting muscle for much longer, some people have better base VO2, some people have shiny hair and soft smooth skin even though they grew up on a sheep-station. One of those "Dr Karl Kruzelnicki factoids" is that historical family names were associated with profession, and people named 'Smith' are heavier than people named 'Taylor' even hundreds of years later. As for why people seem confident that Parish will be a Smith not a Taylor, hard to say. He does seem to have a pretty solid torso, and there's some photos around where there's a lot of sinewy muscle in the arms and legs. Really the only way to find out would be to cook him and find out if he is more like kangaroo or wagyu.

That is one of the best ruckman highlight reels I've seen in a while. Project player to pick up with 46?