DeeSpencer

Because salary makes them stronger. They now have the chance to keep all their young stars. They’ve also had 2 extra first and 2 extra second rounders through the academy. It’s those selections that mean they can move picks back for future years. I hate it, but for once they are using picks to do more than just draft players, they are trying to retain the list they have of young stars and overpaid but ok senior guys.

Brisbane don’t need to, they just need to get healthy. Dogs need a ruck and a key back. Should get both. Port both need nothing and a lot and can’t get it! Last year all we did was Brown - did nothing for half the year, the pick swap - nothing until the last 7 weeks, and came out as the best team in the comp for the first half of the season. The big thing we did was change assistant coaches and a lot of clubs are doing that.

Declase is 24, he doesn’t rank under 22’s because that would require watching games. So Declase gets a ranking, Turner doesn’t.

Fritsch is an A grade goal kicker but C grade at everything else, that what makes him borderline to me. A grade players don’t have many holes in their game. Maybe a slight weakness here or there like Oliver’s kicking but they can do almost everything else. That said, if Fritsch’s finals put him over the line I can respect that.

My bad. 1 elite player and trade Oliver Bucky is not who I want to be!

Oliver the last guy who was destined straight for the centre square. Sparrow probably had close to a first round rating and Rivers (also rated highly), Bowey and Laurie were all junior mids who could end up there. Spargo too. I reckon we’re getting closer to the scenario every recruiter wants which is to draft quality midfield types. Then if they can win it on the deck, chase and tackle they go to Greg Stafford, if they can halve contests, evade and kick they got to Troy Chaplin. Hand one or two over to Yze after a few preseasons

You really argued that well. Good contribution.

Disagree. It's always development mode. The best coaches like Hardwick, Clarkson, Sheedy have always played kids when they are ready to freshen up their 22, build depth and keep the era rolling. Lesser coaches like Ross Lyon stick with depth players and leave a big dark hole. A really good local coach said to me once, pick your best side but if you're stuck deciding on the 22nd guy then go with the young player. It's simple but sage advice. I was worried we waited too long to give Bowey a chance. Turns out we got it just right, but if the Hunt injury/Hibbo loss of form happened any later we'd be chucking him in to final with 2, 1 or no games experience. Once guys start playing like AFL footballers in the VFL then it's time to take opportunities to get them a taste to see how they go. Sparrow really came on later in the year, but his first half was heavily interrupted by the sub rule and no VFL games. He shouldn't be guaranteed a game and hopefully he won't need to be, but he also deserves a sustained run at it through a few ups and downs to solidify his spot. Same goes for JJ if the opportunity arises. It's not gifting games, it's just a reflection that in 3-4 years time someone like Dunstan is probably retired whilst these guys might be the backbone of our midfield. It doesn't mean we don't need depth, Dunstan's not my cup of tea but I understand the move, but I reckon Goody's had a real knack of playing kids when they are ready and giving them the right amount of time. That should continue.

About the same odds as Hawthorn and the Dogs missing it in 2009 and 2017. Easy to look at the reasons they missed out now in hindsight and say they won't apply to us but I doubt anyone was saying they would before the start of those years. I'd put missing the finals next year as not much less likely than us winning the flag by 70 points before this year. The inability to land a big fish and the possibility of ending up with a pick somewhere between 10-14 next year and having a top 5 guy on JT's board fall to that range are probably more compelling reasons not to do this trade than our pick being in the single figures.

Luke Jackson’s the only type of ruck I’d draft in the top 40. Rookie list, late pick or even bring guys in to train over summer is probably all we should be thinking for the ruck. There’s a number of tall forwards in this draft that I’m sure JT will have his eye on. If the cards don’t fall right for those guys my guess is he’ll look where he always looks - combative, quick midfield types, ideally who can play forward (or back).

Yes but we finally worked out that it’s not clearances that matter as much as post clearance contested ball and the quality of the clearances. We set up defensively at stoppages and our aim is to win big or lose small. I’m not convinced Dunstan helps that philosophy as he’s more of a win small type player compared with our big 3 and even Harmes and Sparrow who have power to push through a pack. I’m sure the idea is he helps with the lose small part by chasing and tackling and can get first hands on to help win. Can he learn our quick hands and feet from congestion game? I think our quick long slightly in board of the square direct kicks to talls on the flanks sets up our vital contest, then springs deep forwards open. That we can score and defend that kick is really our attacking game plan. And it’s the power and speed of our mids to get to those drops and retain possession that powers us. We win the contest, chain a few handballs then we’ve got forwards open. Apart from contested work I think Sparrow just has more of a forward game than JJ. So he got the nod where Harmes got the mid/forward/wing covered. Our defensive game plan is all about a whole lot of midfield and forward spread. One players pressures and 17 cover the outlets. They must think that Dunstan has that level of tank and can follow the instructions. But his lack of speed is a worry. I guess we’ll find out

I disagree, Richmond drafted Thomson Dow and Riley Collier Dawkins who are both talented but haven’t helped them. Nothing beats top level talent which is far easier to find right at the top. I’m certainly backing Jason Taylor in but there’s definitely a tipping point where the higher pick is just flat out better. Anyway, let’s go out and draft a superstar and then win the flag again. That sounds good. I am pro that idea!

We had the best injury run ever and lost Burgo. We’ve lost the ability to trade for Cerra this year by not having our pick, next year that means no Ben King or other highly rated player most likely. And Collingwood probably though getting 2 nice picks was better than their first rounder this year until they tumbled from finals to second last. Having seen the locked in deal I’ll say it’s fine, maybe even good, but have to at least consider this won’t be good if we miss finals.

We were originally linked with 19 but now it's 17, either way, we really can't get a better pick back for the one we gave up. Not at all worried about next year, just a little concerned about the idea of doing deals without any upside in the deal itself. When we traded for the picks that became Weid, Pickett and even the 2 for 1 with Bowey/Laurie we gave up future picks that the other teams banked on being good picks. We outperformed expectations in each of those years and ended up either breaking even or getting value on the trade itself, yet alone the player. There was room for us to improve. Significantly even with the Pickett deal when we're coming from finishing 17th, even though North I'm sure doubt we would be that bad again. We weren't relying on JT finding better players than the picks we gave up. We risked it for the future to get him the best possible picks we could find at the time, then improved so that we didn't lost out. We have to finish in the 8 to avoid disaster with this deal. Hawks 2009, Dogs 2017, it happens but I'm fine with that risk. Unless there's a whole bunch of academy players or a dodgy draft crop next year we probably have to finish in or close to the top 4 for it to really break even. And once again, I recognise JT has been amazing, but we still should give him the best possible picks not the quickest possible picks. We didn't cough up a 2nd rounder or 3rd rounder at all, moving only a couple of places. Once I saw that I'm much more comfortable that the risk (falling down the ladder) v reward (immediate access to a player) is much more balanced. Had we paid a nice juicy 2nd rounder for a very late 1st I wouldn't have been as keen on it. I'm surprised Adelaide and Dogs did this deal to be honest. There's enough in it for both of them but they might've got more come trade night.

Unless they're a top pick who's had injuries or a promising tall almost anyone uncontracted and outside a clubs best 22 has little to no value these days. For instance Lipinski's 23, played 50 games and is fairly solid, would play each week at a lot of clubs, the Dogs want to give a 3 year deal to say, but the Pies aren't offering more than pick 50 so far.

We've done it 3 times with Weids, Pickett and Bowey, but also stayed in the 2nd round and drafted Spargo, Sparrow, JJ, Petty, Fritsch, Rivers etc as well. Can put it down to the process or can also put it down to JT being really good at drafting? There's an alternate reality where we've traded back in the draft a number of times, giving JT and fleet of 2nd and 3rd round picks and he's knocked them out of the park too. I've been pessimistic because for 57 years Melbourne didn't really give me much reason not to be, including a run of a best part of a decade butchering trades and high draft picks too. And I've examined the analytics because Liverpool, the Moneyball baseball teams, Brentford, the Houston Rockets etc have do so too. If the cost here has only been a slight shuffle in the 2nd and 3rd rounds - one or both of which probably gets shuffled around with Taj Woewodin anyway, then I'm immediately more optimistic. Make finals next year and there's only so much we can lose out. But I stand by the point that this is the first time we've been unable to improve our ladder position to shift the deals in our favour and improve the strategic benefit, and it also seems very early on when deciphering who will be available come draft night. I'm definitely more positive seeing the deal now but it was well worth debating. Oh and the best case to calm anyone's fears - the year we wanted to trade out of the pick that became Luke Jackson - we nearly did for Zak Butters. I'm glad we've got the big fella but I could settle for Butters.

Sure was and I’m sure he was in their plans somewhere. Only JT and the club will know who they wanted and who they got, and whether there was any meaningful difference. Strike early, strike hard, hope the draft falls our way seems to be the thinking. In JT we trust

I thought the 2nd rounder from the crows being right at the back was a little too much but Petty was a great pick and we improved again the next year. It’s the ability to improve and make our pick better that I’ve always liked. Our destiny has been in our own hands

Bowey’s far more the exception than the rule. It’s a chance, but we’d be planning more for years 2-4 than year 1. Id be keen on selling picks like the way GWS did to get the Pies pick 2. Which is an amazing result but there’s teams that will overpay and gamble if you’re patient. Our current young crop is so strong we might have to give some guys up as well. In a lot of ways rather than rushing in for more draft capital we could hold off a year or two and give JT a super strong hand. In normal drafts too. The Bowey result is even more remarkable given he’d missed most of 2020 and the kids have suffered again this year.

The AFL might prevent that deal. But the other aspects of that were: 1. the Suns probably wanted North’s future second, making it only a small downgrade 2. Cerra probably meant us trading someone out. 3. MacPherson also isn’t keen on getting traded on his current deal and becoming a lame duck. He wants a team to commit to him properly with a longer deal or to push his claims at the Suns rather just than being dumped. Geelong did their future first for Richmond’s last year. The tigers must not have loved the draft and they banked on the Cats being at least marginally worse. I think the Suns pick will require more than than that. If it was available cheaply to North at one stage it probably won’t always be so.

Weideman - didn’t work Pickett - worked, filled a need, original deal was bad value that turned in to solid value after swapping picks with Freo. Improving to mid table ladder position sure helped the deal. Bowey/Laurie - got great value due to outplaying Brisbane/over performing expectations. Bowey’s well worth the first rounder, ended up with Laurie for a small second round downgrade. My concern this year is we’d be trading a future first and something for pick 19, so we’d immediately be losing, with no room to make up ground. The best we could do is break even on the first rounder and not have given up much else. It’s also unlikely the kid we take makes immediate impact. And it’s a future pick that could go to identifying and filling a need with a proven experienced player next year. And if we do it now there’s no way we’re guaranteed to get who we want. Im a broken record on this but no matter how many times they deny it I reckon they wanted Max Holmes and had him poached last year. They really liked Macrae and maybe Angwin too. Without the benefit of our fate being in our own hands in terms of ladder position improvement nor the ability to guarantee who we’re selecting I don’t like this idea. A lot of risk for what reward?

Harmes certainly has up and down quarters or even games, but I'm not so convinced by this idea that he's completely up and down. Most of his variance comes from the role he's been asked to do. If you play him consistently as a midfielder and with a mix of defensive assignments ranging from hard tag to occasional minding at stoppages he'll give you pretty much the same outcome most weeks. Great tackling, lots of hard run, some much needed line breaking and some occassional dodgy disposal/decision making. Play him as a 4th midfielder with a bit of half forward and wing he'll contribute very solidly there just as he did in finals. Play him too much half forward and it won't be as pretty, he doesn't get the time and space to run and decision making is harder there. Play him down back and we won't talk about that... Overall though he can step in to a full time midfield role at any time and can also step back to splitting time on a flank and wing and providing run, aerial contest, pressure and tackling there too. As a full time mid he's only better than Dunstan due to his pace. As an overall player he's more valuable because he can move around. Brayshaw gets a lot of credit for selflessly taking a team role on the wing. Harmes giving up a lot of centre square time and deferring for Viney and then being rotated through positions in the finals deserves similar praise. We won't be in any hurry to move him on until our half forward and midfield depth is a lot stronger than hoping Laurie can play and signing Dunstan.

I know he’s small and not overtly physical but I liked the look of some of his VFL games in the midfield. He lacks the speed to be all that dangerous deep forward so can only compete with the high half forward types, but a full preseason and more VFL footy in the guts could really up his midfield ability. More touches, more contests also improve his belief if he gets called up to the senior side as a forward. Similar to ANB’s progress. Clearly we’re light on for midfield depth where as the Crows lack top end talent but are very deep with recently drafted mids. I’d be selling him on being the number 1 depth mid (or number 2 behind Dunstan). He wouldn’t be best 22 at Adelaide and they’d have more invested in early draft picks too.

May, Oliver, Petracca, Gawn are undoubtable. Oliver slipped a little last year but they all should’ve been A graders last year. Salem was knocking on the door and cemented himself this year. Lever found the consistency that he flashed last year and became the A grader he was meant to be. Gus had a great grand final but is no where near A grade and neither is Langdon even accounting for his brilliant work rate. He was A grade for the first half of the year but not the second half. Viney showed what he’s capable of in finals but misses too many games with injury and has a few too many shaky regular season games to quality as A grade. Fritsch is very close, can argue either way, probably needs to back it up next year to me. Unless the grand final tips him over. He’s a B++ along with Langdon and Viney. Ben Brown’s end to the season was that level as well. Melk and Weid are C graders too, just a bit too flawed to be reliable. All the premiership players are key parts of a premiership team. I don’t care if they are 19 or 22 or where they will be in a few years time. They’re all solid B graders right now. There’s no young players who were carried. Every one of them earned their spot.

I want our players running out each week with a desire to be the hardest at the contest. And also the fittest and most skilled if possible too! And if you can’t win a share of your own ball you’ve got no place in AFL footy. But I’m also glad we’re a team that recruits Langdon, sticks with Fritsch through quiet games, backs in a tiny young fella in Bowey to play finals after 4 games, sees the value of Spargo’s running to space and kicking even if he’s not winning much of the ball.