Dr. Gonzo

Just watched that highlights video - yes please! Obviously it's a tiny sample of his "highlight" plays but he seems to have a well-weighted kick, burst speed and a good attack on the footy. Would love either one of him, Sheed or Crouch.

Don't worry there'll still be plenty to choose from next year.

Who cares? If he can play as good as Swan he can shoot smack into the veins in his eyelids for all I care.

I was talking about Howe, I wouldn't trade Frawley unless he said he was out the door and even then I'd do my utmost to keep him. Yeah Howe may have been our leading goal kicker but our team was [censored] and we have Clark, Hogan, Dawes and Watts to play there. Howe is one dimensional, can't do much through the middle and is an average set shot. I don't want to throw him away for nothing but I wouldn't lose sleep if we gained something decent for him. It's pretty funny, I got the same response two years ago when I said we should trade out Jamar while other teams would still be willing to give us something good for him, now we try to give him away and no one will take his contract off our hands. People weren't happy when we traded Johnstone or when McLean wanted out either (before he decided to go I thought we could only have 2 of McLean, Moloney & Jones on our list and thought he was the weakest of the 3 anyway.) it's called good list management and knowing what you have, what you need and how long your assets have before they start to depreciate away.

Pretty sure we said all the same things after drafting Scully, Trengove, Gysberts with Blease, Strauss & Grimes. Not saying I'm unhappy with our trades but there's a lot of water to go under the bridge before I start feeling full-blown optimism.

I don't think anyone wants to get rid of him because they (we) think he's rubbish. It's more about the fact he has currency and is surplus to our needs up forward. If he can develop into a genuine midfield role I'd prefer to keep him, but I don't see it - he's more of a forward flanker type, something we have an over-abundance of.

Interesting points - I guess we won't know until we know.

Misson's third pre-season with them, lets see some of those promised results.

The most pleasing thing over the last couple of months is we have started to get real "football" people involved with the club instead of the usual PR/business types and the old boys club of players from the Northey-era.

Not to mention the supporters who may not have to drown in hopeless despair watching another game over before quarter time. All I want from these types of players is to build a base next year to work off in the subsequent years/trade-draft periods. Getting some respectability back is priority number 1 next year.

That's all well & good, but we need midfielders. Granted we could probably do with a small defender as small forwards often tear us up but trading pick 2 for 2 defenders is pretty stupid when the midfield is clearly our most pressing need by a vast way.

It's about getting our team (and in particular the midfield) as competitive as possible for next season while helping some of our younger mids develop by not having to be relied on as our no. 2 or 3 mids. Don't worry, there will be more draft picks next year and the year after - if we get 3 solid years out of Vince, then that's a win.

Tamato, Tomato

Howe for Shiel won't happen but not because we say no. The thing about trading Howe is you have to weigh up his use to our team vs what he might attract in a trade that could make our team better. Currently he is a high-marking, high half-forward who struggles through the middle and has average to above average goal kicking accuracy. We also have a number of other KPF/high half-forward options in Clark, Dawes, Hogan, Fitzpatrick & Watts. If we can trade him out for a midfielder to add depth to our third world midfield it will be a win. You also have to look at these kinds of players and trade them out when their value is high. No point trying to offer Tapscott in a trade as no one will want him for anything more than a 4th/5th round pick. It's the same logic that should have seen us try to offload Jamar two years ago and Sylvia several years ago. We got something decent for McLean at the right time but not a choice of our own making however got a decent pick back for Travis Johnstone when we saw he still had some value. Considering a trade for Howe doesn't mean he is not rated, in fact it's the opposite. It's just that his relative value to our team is low compared to what we might get for him in return and his value is likely to decrease with age over the next couple of years rather than increase. You don't throw him away for nothing but if you can get something back that will improve our team (namely a midfielder), you do it.

Very true - which a why it's pretty stupid to go around regurgitating them as fact.

Getting someone who can help us not get thrashed by 50+ points every week next year should be the number 1 priority.

Yeah fair enough

That's basically saying you think Blease is worth pick 10?

That's true and when I say he wouldn't offer us anything it's more in the "he's a wrong fit for where we are now" thing rather than a "he wouldn't improve the side" thing. Try and sound him out but I doubt he'd give us much if a second glance, he'd want to finish his career playing in big games and September not trying to lift a cellar dweller to mid-table.

Why Jon Ralph is as much of a tool as Barrett Hutchy and the rest of the sycophants. He retweeted a brain fart someone had, wouldn't read too much into it.

Good post mate, sums up what I was thinking and seems to back it up with stats. Could do with a few more paragraphs though Can I ask where you got the CD stats/comments from?

First off I never said classy mids, I said we have often chosen the kids I the draft who look to have the class over some who seem a bit more raw but potentially have more of an impact straight away (such as Watts over NicNat, Cook over Darling, Toumpas over Wines). Secondly I was saying some of those classy players are still on our list, not all of them. And when drafted thy were taken because they were seen to be high skilled options such as Strauss and Blease. Thirdly where did I write off Trengove and Toumpas? I said they needed someone to help them out in the middle while they develop due to our dearth of bigger bodies in the middle and around the packs. Last year we chose Toumpas (class) over Wines (grunt) - that's fine I'm not unhappy with that decision but I think this year we need to opt for a bigger body to help out and complement the smaller guys and help Jones and Viney in the clinches. I would look at some of the guys Richmond has drafted like Conca, Vlastuin and Martin and think we need to get some guys like this in our team who can compete in the AFL and not just look good against third level players. I have no obsession as you put it, I have a view that we need a well-rounded list and don't want to see us make the same mistakes as before when we had a team of Johntone, Yze, Bruce, Green etc skillful players who could beat weaker teams quite easily yet went to water against the better teams. What's embarrassing is your inability to comprehend ideas more complex than class v brawn, small v big.

Trengove, Toumpas Don't respond to my posts anymore if you're just going to act like a moron.

Morton, Grimes, Maric, Watts, Blease, Strauss, Trengove, Gysberts, Cook, Toumpas - all players taken as they had class/skill and potential rather than ready to go and runs on the board with perhaps a perceived lower ceiling. Haha yeah, whatever. It's more a case of we already have those kinds of players on our list, we need some grunt to complement them and start winning the ball/clearances.

Are you trying to antagonise me?