DeeSpencer

The most concerning part of the article IMO was the last line. West Coast have agreed to across the board 7% cuts. In addition to 2 less senior listed players that probably makes up the 9% reduction. Other clubs will have players hold firm on the 3.5%. Or negotiate back end deals that see them only truly give up 3.5%. West Coast will then end up with a 3.5% margin over other clubs. That’s one free best 22 player. The AFLPA should’ve laid out an exact plan on how the 9% was going to be deducted. As for Essendon - I’m sure they meant well. Better to withhold some of the cash than pay them more than they’ll end up earning and make a deduction in future pay. Every club should be holding 3.5% back because that’s the minimum all players will be giving up.

Geelong seem to do better with recruiting and retaining players than any other side. Sleepy hollow + good surf beaches seem to be a winning combination. Most afl players are in long term relationships by 25, married with kids soon after. The simple life appeals. Clearly it’s harder with Vic clubs targeting players that they don’t do to Geelong, but it’s possible. If you got Chris Fagan and David Noble to do what they’ve done in Brisbane you’d get similar results.

I’ve never seen anyone as desperate to get discounted school fees as Stevo is at Xavier. Reports on them nearly as much as he does the Kennel

We’ve got Brown and Weideman, 2 big forwards who lack mobility. Are you dropping one of them for Preuss? And why leave Jackson out of the side when he’s absolutely ready to play. He doesn’t need Casey time to be hungry. Preuss was injured for the first half of the year and has had a number of niggles last year. A second round pick and to cash out of his contract, this was the time. There’s no way his value was going up even if he played 22 games. A pick inside 30 for a 26 year old ruck, come on now? Clearly the hope was to bring Andrew Phillips in for Tom McDonald. We’ll wait a year for a different Phillips type, they’re always available. In the short term - I have full faith in a Jackson/Tom McDonald tandem holding their own if needed as they did against Goldstein. Geelong just made the grand final with a Stanley/Blicavs combination. Jackson/T Mc, Jackson/Ben Brown, Jackson/Weid. Plenty of ways to cover.

Port missed the finals last year after a customary fade out and got very close to winning it all this year. There has to be some allowance for injuries, close losses, young players tiring, new players and coaches adjusting etc. Because we can pretty much repeat 2020 and change 1 result and make finals. Which won’t be satisfactory to me. Or we can change the game plan, blood some young defenders, shake up the midfield mix and persist with a very inexperienced forward line (even with BBB) and actually get closer to a flag. We should do all that and make finals, but there’s a chance we struggle at times but overall find a better formula. It can’t all be wins and losses.

I feel like the afl have to take a fair bit of blame for this one. The deal with the players wasn’t finalized, which meant the salary cap and deferment of payments and so on is also up in the air. Collingwood and the Dogs probably couldn’t get exact details confirmed. But it’s the AFL’s fault for making sure finances aren’t agreed to in trades. Then if there’s unusual amounts due to this year’s unique circumstances they could be fighting over them now. But 50k max not 200k!

That's from Mitch Cleary. Then this from the AFL press release: So it looks like the Category B isn't restricted based on the number of A rookies. It's independent of it and capped at 2. So we should be going out and finding another Cat B guy at the some stage. But the main and A list are restricted to 42 total. So we really should aim to just have 36 on the main list. Given we're currently at 34 that might be hard to achieve.

The minimum senior list is 36 not 37, but we'll have at least 37. Given we have 1 Cat B in Bradtke, I'd suggest the best thing to do is to have a senior list of 37, and then 6 A rookie spots (filling 5 initially). If we went 38 main list, Bradtke, max 5 A rookies we'd be paying 80k extra in the cap for no reason. So we either take just the live 3 draft picks or we demote someone back to the rookie list (assuming we still can) if we want to take a 4th pick or a delisted free agent on to the main list.

No clarity on whether he’ll have to be demoted to a rookie spot and then replaced or whether they’ve got all his payout in to 2020. Although it reads like they might’ve. All largely academic. As for the player - we got the medical report badly wrong. And we so badly that we were prepared to go to 3 years rather than a 1-2 year punt. In fairness other clubs probably thought 1-2 was worth a go so there was likely competition. But the lesson is don’t stuff around with guys with bad concussion histories, it’s not worth it for anyone.

Just seems odd that Hawthorn would give up on him when it was clear this year was going to be a challenge for many young players. Unless they think the lack of endurance, work ethic or injuries just aren’t fixable. Let’s get him in for a summer with Burgo and see if he can earn a list spot.

Maybe it’s the socks up look but to me he seems a bit stiff in the hips and a bit of a straight line mover. Most of his tackling is straight on and same with his ball winning. Medium forwards who aren’t proven mids and don’t project as the right athletes to be good pressure players often drop. Curtis Taylor was similar and it’s still a question if he’ll be a steal or a flop. Melksham’s declining value to us similar. At that height defenders can shut you down more often than not so you have to provide value with pressure, skills in congestion and/or midfield versatility.

Mat Walker from the Hawks is an interesting one. 188cm forward, kicked 23 goals from 15 games in his first year including 5 and 4. Overlooked by the Giants as an academy player and now cut quickly by the Hawks but he can find the goals. Might not have the tank or speed to be a good pressure and defensive player but skilled goal kickers are hard to find and sometimes make nice half backs as well. From up your way, any insight @dazzledavey36

His kids live in Adelaide I believe. If he wants to be back home I could understand that. But we’d want a proper succession plan

Gawndog has us bidding on Coleman and Gulden from the Lions and Swans pushing our second pick out 2 more. Whilst our first pick will be pushed back by at least 3 spots and possibly more. Could be 21/22, could be 25/26, or could be as above where we bid on some of the players

I think Chandler can play, I’m glad we kept him. He’s a good package of athleticism, has a decent aerial game that covers his lack of height but more than anything he has skills - can kick on both sides - and natural footy smarts. I’m not sold on the half back move but I’d like to see him play a mix of forward and on ball at Casey.

Mahoney has said the pursuit of Smith was about leadership as much as outside run. The Hawthorn system coming with Yze surely played a role. Lewis Jetta hasn’t played wing for years now and was never good at the contest, I don’t think he’d be good in that role. He’s been great at times for the Eagles at half back but he’s also had numerous flat spots and tailed off since 2018. I don’t think he’s really up for the contest any more. Theres a good likelihood Nev would like to have his cousin. Possibly Koz as well, assuming he’s also a relative. But Toby Bedford’s family is from a whole different part of WA and he grew up in Victoria. Strong indigenous representation at the club is important but I think it’s way too simplistic to suggest it does anything for any individuals. I don’t think Bedford would be impacted by Lewis Jetta at all.

Clubs and managers would’ve been surveying the delistings and uncontracted players for weeks now, with the ability to trade a token pick for anyone we really wanted in the trade period. Anyone actually in demand will get picked up soon, but the most likely situation is doing what we did with Brown and Corey Wagner, having them pull out of the drafts and signing them after. Yes we could create list spots other ways but Lockhart was the most obvious. The promotion on a one year deal is just a token gesture.

Don’t think so. Any Cox or other DFA pursuit would’ve been before we locked in the last 5 guys including promoting Lockhart. Cox is probably rare as a delisted free agent worth a gamble on 2 years. Most other names available look like supplemental list types. If we had secured Cox we could’ve just kept Lockhart on the rookie list.

Phil Merriman. Bummer. I was thinking they could work out a succession plan with him and Burgo.

‘From next season’. Sounds to me like there’s every possibility Burgo goes either next October or possibly in March once he’s got us through the preseason. If it’s a compassionate release for family reasons and we’ve had time to find a replacement I’m completely fine with that.

In all seriousness they asked for 1 priority pick last year. The AFL said year, and gave them a package that included: - Pick 2 (2019) - Pick 20 (2019) - Pick 11 (2020) - traded for Matt Sharp - Pick 19 (2021) - possibly stripped at a later date Free listing of academy players Budarick (2019) - 2nd or 3rd rounder Rosas (2019) - 2nd or 3rd rounder Alex Davies - likely first round pick Joel Jeffery - likely pick 10-30 Brodie Lake - late round pick It's the most ridiculous and massive draft haul that all but guarantees success. And yes, the AFL has gifted them 49 list spots because they've given them all these extra players for free, they have to have the list spots to keep them. It's disgusting.

I don't think it's correct to assume Lockhart is one of the 3 draftees. In fact, I'd assume the opposite. When reporting on draftees I think that clearly means how many fresh faces we'll take in the draft. We'll certainly be looking at pick swaps and will likely make some, but my guess is it will end up in 3 picks. I doubt we'd only want 2 new kids. This list needs fresh new talent, any less than 3 solid national draft picks would be crazy.

You can't change what you owe him but you can totally delist and redraft a player in order to pay them out. Sydney did it with Tippett. Hawthorn did it with Langford. It makes a difference to the senior spots. Which at the moment we don't think we'll need but that's not a certainty. Personally I'd always want 1 spare senior spot before the draft is done. We just don't know who will be available towards the back end of the draft and having to sit back and wait for that player to fall to pick 10 of the rookie draft seems potentially risky.

Without knowing the details I'd think about moving KK on to the rookie list too so we can use pick 50 or sign a delisted free agent if we need to. I'd always want the flexibility to bring in a player you want if you can rather than be forced to wait until the rookie draft.

So Richmond had 19 under 184cm on their list and by my count 11 in the Premiership side and you're upset because we have 12 on the list in total? Viney and Langdon are midfielders. Sparrow and Baker are their back ups. 2 inside, 2 outside. That's fine. Salem will have competition from Jetta, Lockhart and Chandler (played as a defender) for what could easily be 2 spots down back. It might only be 1 of them in the team as we go with a taller backline but 4 guys for 2 spots is reasonable. Same thing up forward, 2 spots, 4 guys. Kozzie, Spargo, Bedford, ANB. I'm more worried if they are good enough than if they are tall enough.