Radar Detector

Our recruiters rated Salem as pick 3 before the draft and had him ahead of Kelly and behind only Boyd and Billings. Who knows which of the two will be better but we were happy with the result on draft night and I doubt anything has changed.

You lot are unbelievable. That bump was poor technique. Didn't get low enough. But to say he didn't attack the contest... FMD

And does it not follow you get the most bang for buck moving on the WORST players on the list not, not those players that get regular games in the 1s irrespective of how frustrating they can be at times? Unless of course you can trade up an NQR but that is harder to get right.

Wold not be surprised if we're throwing a packet at Cameron as this could achieve one of two things. Either we strike gold and he signs, or we increase his value and thereby dislodge another player (Patton or Shiel for example). Either way, that would be a great result for us.

I'm not going to keep this up but neither are Watts' and Dunn is much further into his career. 2013 11th 2013 16th (injured from round 15) 2011 9th In any event, I find myself arguing a position I don't feel passionately about so happy to tap out from here. I think we both essentially think the same thing about Watts.

This is the nonsense. If he starts producing consistently good games then the previous games, however many of them there are, are irrelevant. A sunk cost. Dunn is a good example. Not even a full season of being very good and he became "our most important signing" according to many. On that evidence, about 18 good games erases 7 or 8 seasons of crap. As I have said repeatedly, the issue with getting rid of Watts is that he is currently in our best dozen so delisting makes no sense. Therefore, a trade is the only way he will leave and I doubt we will get in a trade what his worth is to our side specifically. Take him out of the team and who exactly other than Vince can hit a target regularly? And yes BB, this does speak to the quality of our list at present.

This line of thinking is ridiculous IMO. We waste no more time on Watts than we do into Bail or Matt Jones or Nicholson or McKenzie or Strauss and he performs well ahead of all of them and is probably in our best 6-10 players. Not great for a number 1 pick but not a complete disaster either. And I also get the impression from Roos' comments that Watts is doing exactly what is asked of him, unlike a number of others. The fact that we don't know exactly what he is being asked to do week to week is our problem, not his. I agree with jnrmac that Watts' skills make him tradeable unlike many others on the list but, as always, it's a question of whether the benefit would outweigh the cost. Given our team is muched improved in winning the ball but fundamentally incapable of retaining it, I doubt we would be taking any quantum leaps forward by trading him. You might also recall that Dunn, who you reference, was an undisciplined waste of space for about 6 or 7 seasons before coming into his own just last year.

Interesting quote from PR: “What happens with individuals, when the team doesn't play well, certain players get looked at because people know Jack Watts more than they know Rohan Bail or Matt Jones or whatever. Probably Watts is a good example because he is playing his role, but if everyone else is not playing their role, than it's really hard for him to play his role." Maybe Demonland doesn't have all the insights after all? BBO I'm sure you'd be shocked...

Agree with this, but there are plenty that get less ball and use it less well when they get it.

I'm not sure I would, because as one of the few players in the team with a critical skill there is a fair chance we would be going backwards if we trade him for a pick. While he may not be worth a top ten pick to another side, I think he possibly is to us, certainly in the near term. I'd rather use the three top 20 picks we'll probably have and get rid of as much of the multiple pieces of dead wood on the list as we can. I think we'll have enough room to move without trading a Watts or Howe and will get more bang for our buck that way.

I doubt there will be too many players involved in trades. More likely, I suspect Roos and co will adopt the same approach as last year and use one or two of our higher picks for some more established players - especially if Frawley leaves. Players on the chopping block will be those who have been around a while and can't break into the side. There are plenty of them around including Tapscott, Blease and Strauss for starters. Dan Nicholson is another. And as guys like Salem and Barry come on and Trengove comes back, pressure will come on guys like Bail, Terlich, McKenzie and Matt Jones. Even Grimes. I suspect Watts, as one of only 3 or 4 genuinely good kicks in the team, will be safe for now. We aren't suffering for endeavour, we lack skills once we get the ball and fail to hurt the opposition. The greatest improvement will come as we cycle out blokes who can't kick or make decisions for those who can. As I said, we have plenty of them to choose from.

Back line. While he has the best hands in the AFL, he gets lost too easily up forward and his goal kicking is terrible. He is much more useful taking intercept marks in defence and has proven to be much more consistent there. Agree with nutbean though that he could be a red-time swing man.

It's not. But how about we worry about those in the list who lack these qualities but don't bring serious attributes like Tom. Like RPFC says, he'd be dynamite if we had better users off half back, he shouldn't have to be one of them.

Some people seem to think it's possible to build a team full of perfect players. It's just not. I understand the aspiration to improve and get as frustrated by TMac's disposal as the next guy, but our improvement will be much greater if we get rid of any number of the 'not up to it' players on the list and not a highly capable, 21yo key position player. Where do we find this amazing young lock down KPD with elite disposal anyway? Gee whiz.

My only difference would be to promote Michie not Tapscott given his ability to find the ball. But I realise that won't happen.

^^This. At least the players are learning that a) their best is good enough to win games; but b) if they don't bring AFL level intensity for full games they will lose (Essendon game aside)

Hopefully now the players have some sort of rudimentary understanding of an AFL appropriate game plan, there can be some genuine focus on skills over summer. I have no doubt there is skill improvement within the current list. In any event, we are probably two good mids and a key forward short of a good side. Oh for Mitch Clark and a pre injury Trenners.

Such a shame that there's nobody really pressing from below. At least 3 from today should be automatic outs. I think Roos is trying to make the guys in the twos earn it and would have dropped Salem, for example, weeks ago if there was anyone to promote.

6 Viney 5 Jamar 4 Vince 3 Howe 2 Watts 1 Jetta

He just buys himself time really well and generally makes very good decisions. Looks a class above most.

Skills have been terrible today and not even because of the poor-skilled ins. Our better users are just butchering chances. Play 10% better though and we are right in the game...

For the second week in a row, we have a "mid with only 2 possessions at half time. I'm happy for Roos to use Salem or Riley as the sub but we can't afford players who do a couple of 1%ers but don't get their hands on it for 3 quarters. I think it's about time for Michie and Blease to get a run instead of them for a few weeks.

I agree with some others on Riley's fitness. I also think Salem is much more of a weapon as a sub at the moment as he has struggled to impact games for extended periods thus far but always does a couple of crucial things when he comes on late in the game. I would keep JKH at Casey for one more week, swap Riley and Michie and leave Salem as sub.

I use my Apple TV too. Latest version of the app but older version of the Apple TV box so not sure if that impacts anything. Also, I stream from my iPad...

Should be Salem. Riley is a better chance of impacting the game for longer but Salem would be a dangerous set of fresh legs at the end