Little Goffy

Agreed! I'm agreeing with you... but you're making a point disagreeing with the point I was making. Confusing. Yes, as someone who escaped the statistcal profession, the statistics do tell gross lies quite frequently, and I do think Pedersen's performance needs some work. That wandering around apparently aimlessly... was a bit chronic under Neeld, eh. Being generous to Pedersen, he might have been given a role trying to be the Rivers replacement with cut-out contested and intercept marks. You're quite right hedefinitely needs to all improve a chunk, particularly the placement to get involved. But I guess I should be more clear that I'm not saying 'Pedersen was a good player in 2013' so much as I'm saying 'Pedersen may be a useful player for us in 2014 and is not a dead-weight just yet'.

It's an interesting one. Jones is clearly a player with exceptional 'football character', professional discipline, and an all-round positive attitude to footy and life. He takes an interest in the development of other players, has been in the leadership structure for a while, and has a track record of both giving and receiving criticism in a constructive way. He's an experienced player coming into the peak of his career after already putting in multiple years of consistent high quality performances, and despite a highly physical playing style has managed to barely miss a game in his career. Also, there's not a single other player on our list who meets more than a few of these criteria at once. Particularly the 'consistent quality and not inclined to injury' issue. So why is there doubt about him being the next captain? And there is doubt, even I feel it. What is the psychological need not being filled? Does he need to be taller? Have better posture? More hair? Look better in a suit? Or is it simply that his game is in a 'glamour hole' where he is not seen saving the day with dramatic 1%ers and cut-off marks in defence, kicking bags of goals, or bursting free from the middle to launch attacks? He's a low-hype team-oriented player, does that make him less eligible for leadership? Or does he simply have to wait until he is old enough to fit the archetype filled by James McDonald - the quiet veteran with the respect of all? There's the problem - he doesn't fit with any of the assumed 'images' we have in our heads of what an AFL captain looks like.

I think he has been giving a harsh run of it. Has flaws, has strengths. Statistics are interesting; comparable to James Frawley on most counts, even comparable on 1%ers, both being a big step down from Garland and McDonald, interestingly. On disposal efficiency there's little difference between the two despite Pederson having a higher clanger count. Pedersen even comes out ahead on contested possessions and contested marks. Frawley has a couple of extra total disposals a game, and particularly rebound 50s, which Pedersen is a solid notch behind most of our main defenders (Frawley, McDonald, Garland and Terlich and Dunn are all around 3.5 a game, Pederson 2.5.) However, that reflects Pedersens use as a utility at times, with the rebound 50 + inside 50 count comparable. Also reflecting this, Pedersen contributes on the scoreboard occasionally, with a 'midfielders' typical tally of half a goal a game. In fact, after going through all the statistics I could find, my conclusion is that Pederson is seriously unfairly maligned. Only a small improvement would make him a regularly useful contributor as a tall utility and back-up defender. Certainly it wouldn't take much for him to become more useful, and more versatile, than Lynden Dunn. Pedersen has the advantage there of actually being able to stand a tall forward, whereas Dunn kind of takes up the 'role space' that Frawley and McDonald could use to better effect, rebounding from 50. In a choice between Pedersen or Dunn, I'd go with Pedersen right now.

I've taken a very philosophical, calmly detached approach to the last 18 months or so, accepting that football would not be a source of much joy. But when I think of "St Kilda, Round 1 2014", I stir up a little. I remember Cameron Bruce getting targeted and crunched at the first bounce all those years ago, specifically because he'd finally found some truly superb form, which he then never got back. I remember the elimination final, the astonishing twists, getting monstered by Gehrig, who looked like the matchwinner, until he had a brain fart facing Nathan Carroll. Mclean and, coincidentally, Bruce, being key winners on the night. And that starts me on a whole reminiscing kick. Demons playing finals. The amazing/horrible game against Adelaide, the disappointments of being outclassed upon arrival in 2004/05. Which of course takes the mind back to the desperate final rounds surge in the emotional, up and down year of 2005. Coincidentally, the year we started with three wins led by a rampant Cameron Bruce and were expecting another in round 4 against St Kilda. Anzac Day night game against Sydney (when Brock Mclean stamped himself as everyone's 'future captain'). And of course, on indulgence, the 2000 preliminary final win over Carlton. All these things flood back, even the remarkable win late one year over Sydney, and the horrible 150th anniversary game in the sleet and wind against Geelong. Pardon my ranting. How many days to go?

Hmm, now that you mention, I guess Nathan Jones does seem to have been taking a bit more of a leadership role over the last year in particular. I do wonder why this hasn't been discussed more elsewhere. (Edit - alas for the lack of a sarcasm font, some people thought I was serious in my wondering. There have been threads all over the place about this, for about two years, plus the traditional 'future captain' posts made about him six years ago as soon as he got his first rising star nomination. I was just trying not to be harsh on the OP)

They just keep coming back every now and then. Almost everyone has the disease, but some people just suffer from it more often than others.

My impression of Sylvia's 'story' with the Demons is a mixed one. Clearly had issues with alcohol and the nightlife, clearly was not particularly disciplined when it came to 'football lifestyle expectations'. There's no doubt that this contributed to the fact he never player a full season and was never able to push up a notch to be the consistent, elite player he obviously could be. But, he was a good player overall. Short of elite, short of what the expectations were, and short of earning the salary he expected. But a good quality player. Anyway, returning to Vince. He seems to be the 'mostly harmless' type, even when [euphemism alert] playing loose with AFL lifestyle expectations. Not going completely off his brain, not getting connected to criminals, not getting violent or abusive. He also appears to have a good general work ethic and application to training. I'd want to know more about how seriously he takes recovery from games and that sort of thing - is his drinking and merry foolishness at least contained to official down time? As a side note, I'd argue that Vince is more of a replacement for Moloney than for Sylvia. Dom Tyson could be the more like-for-like step in for Sylvia, surely?

Precisely. But who is this Vale guy?

So your ACTUAL point was that people were hypocritically stigmatising pokies but not sport and alcohol, but you don't see it as suggesting anyone was hypocritical. Nice. I see what you did there.

I'm shocked by how few of those players I'm thinking "erm... probably shouldn't be playing AFL games just yet / ever"

Maybe you weren't looking at the time? I raised it as something that troubled me when other clubs first did it (Sportsbet etc.) and when our club joined the wagon with DeesBet. Seriously, poor form to suggest that people are being hypocritical on the basis that you didn't actually know anything about their track record. Aren't you one of the guys that keeps getting banned for personal/irrelevant attacks and derailing threads?

Aggressive? Unethical? I'm not that much a fan of 'aggressive' as a corporate culture for a community organisation. Though I understand people use 'aggression' to refer to 'actually doing things' sometimes. Because... I dunno... Definitely not ok with unethical. There is nothing better about poker machines than making a living selling addictive drugs. The only thing making it acceptable is that enough people are involved and invested to keep the social pressure down.

Tom Scully is a 'basically adequate' player, it seems. The kind who plays 200 games. But if we still had him, we'd be ranking him below Watts and Trengove. Tom Scully notches up the highest ratio of 'clangers' to disposals in the whole AFL. And I've not seen him be especially dangerous or daring in any way that would excuse that figure.

Yep, the licencing arrangements for poker machines is little short of corrupt, and the revenue streams tell a disturbing tale. Poke machines place in areas with high poverty, low education, and in particular sustained unemployment, get higher revenue because you're more likely to find people who will become addicted. The facts are simple - the best poker machine revenue comes from addicts, by a huge margin. And the best addicts come from overall vulnerable populations. All the other clubs on the list the OP has pasted, except ours, lay claim to being financially secure, growing steadily and with numerous solid revenue streams. On the other hand, we'd go belly up without that revenue. It is my quiet ambition that the Demons be the first of that list to one day ditch unethical revenue like poker machines. Not least because it would be a right kick up the egos of those sanctimonious 'look at us providing the welfare to the weak clubs' bastards. It's a lot easier to be ethical when you're strong. One of the key reasons I want Melbourne (and myself!) to really get some financial security in coming years.

'Taking shape', means, of course 'we traded away two of our most promising midfielders and are basically reloading through the draft again'. For a moment, based on the thread title, I though this was going to be something about the way the club gets into a mess thinking that having 'trained the house down' all summer, they are all done and ready to go... complacently into a round 1 disaster that shatters confidence for the rest of the year. Oh wait... it is an article about that. But it's not at Melbourne. Well, that's good news!

Except, Watts has clearly been marked as a midfielder for 2014, and Howe also has been discussed as spending increasing time in the midfield, based on the observation that with a full fitness base he could be a 'total threat' kind of player. I do still worry sometimes about the top-heavy 'look' of our forwards, with Clark, Dawes and Hogan. But I take comfort remembering just how mobile and flexible Clark has proven to be, that Dawes has a glorious work-rate to lead to the wing to present options 80m from the forward line where necessary, and Hogan apparently is some kind of magic act waiting to happen. Anyway, a draftee who is visibly intense and focused during training is a great sign, no question on it. If nothing else, it means he'll gravitate towards the other players with that attitude, and end up giving himself every possible chance of being a solid AFL player and a positive long-term part of the club culture. There's just one problem, it sounds like this Kennedy-Harris kid is not an 4rs3h0le, which as well all know, is pretty much a requirement to be an effective small forward.

Might be time to close this thread. I'll even resist the urge to slip in a last word.

It's a strange fact of Australia - while the transplanted culture from Europe has evolved to become one of the least family-driven in human history, the ancient indigenous culture is one of the most family oriented in the world today. No wonder it is so hard to bridge the gap. Going either way.

Bing, none of the points in my comments were about Liam Jurrah himself. A side conversation had begun about concepts of loyalty and drawing the line, an example was given of whether or not to support someone who had 'belted his wife'. It's possible that some previous posts were edited or deleted which obscured that conversation in the thread.

It only just occurred to me to make the connection - but Tom McDonald would seem to have the same attitude of honesty with self and determination to correct weaknesses as did Nathan Jones. Once upon a time Jones was a promising young player suffering a bit of tunnel vision, a Moloney-like mania for trying to bull through packs instead of work smartly around them with teammates, and an unrealiable kick. One by one, almost like the was knocking them over one pre-season at a time, he came back each year with those weaknesses significantly corrected. All while still retaining the exceptional fitness and constantly being in under the packs with the force and commitment that originally made him a promising kid. I'd argue that Tom McDonald has fewer limitations than Jones did early in his career. McDonald at least has him covered for speed, height, (defensive) reading of the play, and hair. Persistent drilling and smart training with the kicking and vision when counter-attacking could bring him right up to being a capable, dependable, versatile tall defender. A team with three of those (Frawley, Garland, McDonald) would be the envy of many other clubs.

Wines will be a first rate player. Possibly elite. Toumpas is less predictable because his first year gave us very little information. Seeing him get a good preseason underway, and showing signs of improved conditioning already, reminds us that in 2013 he was well out of luck on that count. For those who either saw him play or simply read the glowing reports on him from under-18s (I recall many phantom drafts, amateur and pro, saying "Demon's would be thrilled if Toumpas falls this far, and they would have to take him, despite their interest in a number of other players") I imagine there's an edge of optimism about Toumpas being a forgotten-man bonus for us in 2014, naturally shadowed by MFCSS.

Of those, Murphy and Boak by a considerable margin, for needs, age, and sheer ability. But yes, keeping Frawley is more important than gaining any of them. And I'm quietly confident he will stay with us, too. I would be very interested to see how the value-for-money side of things turns out. Obviously Smurf and Boak would come at a premium, while Ibbotson might be a better 'purchase' when it's time for the end of year saleyard.

Most Kicks: Colin Garland Most Handballs: Nathan Jones Most Disposals: Nathan Jones Most Tackles: Jack Trengove Most Marks: Jack Watts Most Goals: Mitch Clark I'd have both Frawley and Garland in as contenders for most marks. I'm confident that Clark has goals sewn up. Watts took a lot of marks even when out of form. Similarly, Trengove led out tackles last year. Go figure. Something I'd be interested to see is who will provide the 'running bounces'. Or two leaders in that stat in recent years, by big margins, were the duo of Sylvia and Davey. Tyson, Toumpas, Vince? Maybe we'll see Frawley given some extra licence to run free?

Penrith's No.1 spot is the story of why GWS was founded. Sure, most of the rest of Australia likes to imagine Western Sydney as irrelevant except for felafel-eater and cashed-up-bogan jokes, but there's a couple of million people out that way and they decide elections and pump the economy along in a big way. I've seen similar studies of this kind of thing in the past which gave a little more information about what that 'brand valuing' estimate is based on. I can recall; * attendances at games and supporter events * purchasing and wearing of merchandising (with sponsor branding on) * responses to survey questions on knowledge of sponsor companies and things like 'are you more likely to use a sponsor's product?' * media mentions, especially TV appearances with sponsor branding * overall expression of positive/negative feelings about the club (being everyone's 'second favourite club' is a help) From what I can remember, it was the third and fourth items on that list that helped us a lot - during this crisis period a lot of our supporters felt personally grateful to the sponsors like Kaspersky and Hankook and had a notion that those relationships were 'meaningful in intent' rather than just a basic corporate deal. The club was also constantly in the media, mostly controversially but, always there and always giving the impression that the Melbourne Football Club mattered to people. But, there's a huge room for improvement. On the touch-wood assumption that we are finally about to become a respectable club on-field and in terms of management competence, this is a very important few years for riding general goodwill at the same time as reclaiming a competitive status. 'Friendly Rivals' is the goal, we want people to be interested in how their team performs against Melbourne, enough to want to join us at our home games!

Daniel Cross, I'm kind of fascinated by the idea of watching a player in Red and Blue who I know has had huge respect at another club. Almost the James McDonald of the Dogs. Definitely excited and optimistic about Dom Tyson, could be a huge win for us. Keen to see Jeremy Howe in form. Sigh, that's not an especially original group. Can say overall I'm just very keen to see the whole team out there. Whether you think about it by area on the field or age group or anything, there are exciting possibilities this coming year.