DeeSpencer

What about Zach Sproule at the Gaints Jay?

More of a mix of Fyfe/Dangerfield/Stringer even Jaidyn Stephenson style body and game than a Bont from what I've seen. Can drift in and out of games and doesn't have that elite accumulation and pure skills but can win it pretty much any way and can use it with real burst and upside. If he was Bont he'd go pick 1. If he convinces a recruiter the rough edges and inconsistencies can be developed he'll be pick 1.

Shoulder to shoulder I doubt there's any real difference in height. Hawkins has an underrated leap, although his real quality attribute is his power off a few steps. The fat lug was a champion high jumper. He can make ground quickly. Weideman does't have a standout attribute but he has strong versatility and if he puts it together he does a lot of things to a nice level. He can kick, he can gather it on the ground and genuinely handball with fast clean hands on both sides of his body, he can tackle, his tank/speed/agility/strength all aren't terrible, he can present up and he can absolutely leap at the ball. But he doesn't get any thing easy by way of speed, agility or fitness. Plus he drops marks he gets his hands on, misses kicks he should make and then gets injured. Start holding just a couple more marks he gets hands on and making a few more easy shots on goal and he's a useful player. Develop any of his attributes to an above average level and he'll then have some weapons to work with. I feel we've missed a great opportunity to give him some games down back though.

And Adelaide apparently had some interest in Frosty a couple of years ago before he recommitted with us. Keath for Frost, where do I sign?

Would be silly to give him a contract but I'd be fine with the club giving him the Sydney Stack treatment. He can train over summer and see how it goes. Maybe the Hardwick's can provide lodging?

We buggered up the back end of the Oliver draft. Although it was a weak draft. But Mitch King, Hulett, Josh Wagner, Viv Michie and the hope of Joel Smith. We've since add Corey Wagner from this year. Does Lockhart belong in this group as well? Close enough because we need it. We didn't get far with the next draft either. Weideman belongs to this year even though he was taken a year earlier. Hannan, Dion Johnstone ok whatever. But Filipovic (why not at least Ladhams if not Marshall FFS), Tim Smith and Keilty. I actually like the last two picks there, but if you're going to only have 2 picks in the main draft you better be adding some young talent in the rookie spots. The Lever deal isn't the problem. You can argue the value to an extent but we got a good player who should start to improve with some luck. You'd take Lever for pick 10 any day even with the bad run he's had and whilst the pick downgrade was a steep price we still ended up with a useful late 2nd rounder. Spargo, Fritsch, Petty, Baker. Ok that's more like it. One very good player and 3 options who all contribute something, develop them up. Sparrow, Jordon, Nietschke, Bedford, Chandler, Austin Bradtke. Ok good, some numbers to work with. The first 2 should play some games next year if they are developed well. Dunkley is part of this group as well, our crap form let us get an extra bite. The last 4 are speculative but we're looking for role players not stars. If we aren't bringing in 4 or 5 kids each year we're no chance of getting that internal replacement of depth with hungry young players as well as finding some diamonds in the rough. We've clogged our own list up, but it should be able to be unclogged relatively easily.

Roos implied that we could be winning more games and having a better year if we played to a defensive brand of football. There's a side that consistently sets up well behind the ball and does a lot of defensive things well - the Sydney Swans. They've won 1 more game than we have. Richmond defend well because their forward pressure and midfield work rate is excellent and that allows them to keep their backline deep and in position. We don't have the speedy hunting forwards. We don't have hard running outside mids. We haven't had Lever and May in place for most of the year. So trying to copy Richmond would end in disaster. We currently barely have a forward line at all so playing without any flair or attack would almost guarantee losses. Everyone at the club has a lot to improve on but going back to Roos style football isn't the answer. The best thing we can do in the last month is keep going with the general game style that Goodwin believes in and has worked quite a bit the last two years. That's the best way to train our players up for next year. And of course within that the focus should be on the absolute fundamentals - tackles, skills, hard two way running, 1% and team acts.

We won 4 games in year 1 of Roos: against Carlton, Adelaide, Ess and Richmond. And the last 3 there kicked awfully at goal. Ess and Richmond made finals but lost. The entire game plan was long down the line, stack the backline and hope the other team misses chances. In 2015 up until the final round we'd won 6 games: Against Bris, Rich, GC, Geel, Bulldogs. Dogs and Richmond both lost elimination finals. In round 23 that year we played a dead rubber against a Giants side at Etihad and it featured a far different game plan. Dunn was moved forward, Mitch White came in to the side and the team played with a zone defence for the first time, and won at Etihad for the first time. 2016 was Roos as head coach and figurehead whilst we implemented Goodwin's game plan. We were aggressive with the zone defensive system that all the top teams were using. We finally started getting some forward pressure. We moved the ball quickly and started scoring. We beat Hawthorn for the first time in forever. We added some nice away performances. But there were still heaps of negatives including losing to Carlton in round 22 after giving a Port team in contention for finals a nice touch up. 2016 was Goodwin's ideas with Roos' guidance. Then 2017 - more wins and 2018 - more wins again was Goodwin in charge. Yes, there's times he's overdone the attacking strategy but he's also never had a reliable backline out on the park and rarely had a fully fit midfield or hard working forwards. The midfield got younger as it got better, moving Vince, Cross and then Jones to peripheral roles for the young guys to take over. My point is there was no Roos sustainable excellent game plan implemented. Roos set about a simple plan of defending hard and having a crack. I don't even think at any stage this year we've lost our strong attack on the ball and outside the first 5 weeks there's actually been a lot of really hard running and defensive work. It certainly looks like we've lost a lot of the hard working culture that Roos preached but the fitness is bad, the motivation is low, the leadership is poor and the talent is awful right now.

There's problems in fitness, there's problems in list management, there's problems in coaching and everywhere else. The idea that we could fix it all by attempting to play with a particular brand of football ignores all the actual problems.

Brand, brand. Doesn't really mean anything. Yeah we had a brand under Roos - it was defending by flooding numbers back and keeping games low scoring on the hope we'd fluke a win. Roos did nothing about the escalating Misson problem, put it in the too hard basket. Didn't do much about developing the next wave of small forwards and outside runners, they weren't his priority. Where was the foresight that Jones, Garlett, Hibberd would all slow down at the same time and why was the focus then on adding Lewis to that mix? What about coaches, did he have the right assistants in place to support Goodwin? Brand, brand, brand. Load of junk.

Gawn, Oliver, May are in the elite groups at their positions. Tom McDonald, Lever, Salem, Petracca, Melksham are all very good but need to round out their games and that's assuming Tom bounces back and plays like he did after the bye not in the first 10 weeks. Harmes, Viney are next. That's the 10. It's a very good top 10, better than we've had in over a decade, but it's not perfect. I still think Jetta can get back to a really good player for at least a year, there were some good signs on the weekend with some good spoils and his evasive skills and ball use. Brayshaw should be in the top 10 but it's all on hope he can bounce back. Fritsch another with excellent talent. That's 13 and after that it's not pretty. Hibberd (who's dropped way off), Hore, Frost, Lockhart, Jones, Hunt - they are guys I at least trust to have a go. Unfortunately they are 14-19 on the list not 19-24. Weideman, Spargo, Hannan, ANB, the perpetually injured Vanders, KK, Joel Smith, Tim Smith. It hasn't been a good year for the fringe players and that's before we even get to the next level of depth players.

If you can’t run - speed and endurance - and can’t reliably hit targets and don’t have big men to create a contest then you can’t create any kind of game plan that works. It’s a big game of chess and our pieces stink right now. Go through the 22 on the weekend and you’ll find very few who are fit, strong and skilled. Our game plan, work rate and skills (apart from goal kicking) all looked very good against the Eagles. When the Saints got their outside running game going at their home ground, with a fresh coach who’s freed their minds we found it hard to go with them and from there everything falls apart. Panic sets in with the skills, indecision at the contest, self preservation at the contest. Watch the first 10 minutes against the Saints where we were full of confidence and trusting the plan and we looked very good. As soon as fatigue and doubt crept in the side dropped away.

Preuss beating up on a barely key position sized opponent has no bearing on AFL footy. Completely irrelevant. We need all the mobility we can get against the Tigers and that means keeping with Smith. Smith needs the game time to see if he stays on the list too. Freeman's a Casey player so he's not playing AFL for us, he has some nice traits, wouldn't mind having a good look at him over summer. Munro is the dumbest footballer I've ever seen. He has AFL pace/endurance but is pretty much a midfield version of Frost when it comes to using the ball and is probably good for 5 free kicks against a game as well. He makes ANB and Corey Wagner look like smart footballers. No thanks.

In: Hore, Melksham, May (Keilty), JKH Out: J Wagner, Lewis, Oscar, C Wagner FB: Hore May Jetta HB: Jones Frost Lever C: Harmes Oliver Baker HF: ANB Petty Petracca FF: Melksham T. Smith Fritsch Foll: Gawn Salem Viney Int: Brayshaw Hibberd JKH Hunt May and Melksham if right, but no risks taken. Otherwise it's a matter of anyone but the Wagner's.

Only saw brief patches but Hore looked good, Melksham a class above, liked a couple of things from Jordon. And I missed what might've been a rough start but Keilty looked good on what I saw down back, he has to be a better option than Oscar? Couldn't fault JKH's work rate from what I saw. Real shame that the Weid went down. Casey have a final round bye, 2 winnable games and then a huge task of beating top of the table Richmond to make finals. Not out of it but unlikely.

Goodwin has a lot of work to do but.... Roos came in, stacked the side with veteran midfielders and won 4 games and 7 games and steadied the ship with an awful game plan of flooding back and hoping to keep games tight. He got some fundamentals right - defensive work rate was good, attack on the contest was good, defensive spoiling skills were solid. Goodwin then took over and introduced an aggressive zone defence, upped the forward pressure from 0 to actually competent and created an angle changing aggressive ball movement system that challenged a lot of teams as he won 10, 12 and then 15 games. A lot of things have gone wrong this year: 1. Injuries, injuries and more injuries 2. List management failures with lack of quality outside running depth 3. Skill breakdowns - the fundamental handball yet alone kicking skills aren't there 4. Structure around the ball falling away Goodwin has a responsibility in a lot of it but the idea he's suddenly a poor coach after 1 year when he really built this team from little more than Roos' scrappy Vince/Jones/Cross resistance to a prelim final side doesn't make sense to me.

Frost is one of the least fit players in the team, he's a burst athlete who's best footy is down back, the idea he could do anything effective on a wing is crazy. Fritsch is a genuine utility. He's crafty as a forward but it takes good ball movement to find him one on ones or space to lead and his defensive work as a forward is really poor. Normally the best way to get him in space where he can win the ball in the air or link up at ground level will be wing/half back, with some rotations forward. One excellent game against the Eagles and a couple of nice goals against the Saints doesn't change that.

I think Misson did a pretty good job at the things he was meant to be good at - getting players fit and preventing avoidable injuries (especially soft tissues). Even right now Weideman has a sore calf and Joel Smith has his groin, they are the only soft tissue injuries on the list. But Misson was also the head of the whole performance program and the management of long term injuries has been awful. My biggest concern is we had the reigns to Burgess who is another sports science guy and as far as I can tell isn't a physiotherapist and clearly isn't a medical doctor. Will he sort through the injury management issues and maybe even change the culture of the coaches and players in how to far smarter with injury prevention and management? We need to get back to a healthy list to start the year, that much is obvious, but when round 1 comes along next year I hope we have selection, game plan etc all on the right page and there's no more panicked selections of underdone players and hopefully we even play smarter, safer and more controlled footy.

There's some pretty interesting videos from his time at Port. I'm hoping to see some of the stuff he's done with soccer players working on speed and agility worked in to our players. The Hawks at their best and a team like the Tigers now move like a soccer team, keeping in position with strong endurance running then quickly in to explosive actions to tackle or break a line.

Very exciting news. Apart from what seems almost certain improvement in fitness and health of our players I'm hoping it leads to a medium/long term improvement in recruiting and development. I still think we'll need to build up our medical staff around a high performance manager and of course facilities. We all want fit players on the park. And I want to see players, coaches, recruiters etc all the way down challenged to draft/develop/become the best athletes they can be. Burgess' background with world class athletes in soccer hopefully means we can see some speed, acceleration, powerful running in our players that translates to good footy.

I have a number of concerns: 1. Space, there just isn't all that much. Connecting up to the carpark seems important rather than using the space south of the oval because you're going to need access in and out. 2. Oval size. They have to get an MCG sized oval. To do that you're shrinking down the land available for soccer/rugby to 1 rectangular field. I'm not surprised if this did come in conjunction with Victory no longer training there. They might have to change the orientation of the oval to the same way Punt Road oval runs diagonally or even East/West. 3. Pollution, at some stage athletes are going to ask why they have to exercise right next to the freeway exit and one of Melbourne's busiest roads. I hope they look in to building some fencing in particular areas, upping the trees/vegetation etc. 4. Cost. It's going to be spending a lot of money to get a facility that doesn't add value through other businesses and might only last 20-30 years. What's the angle to get Government funding and to make some money from the new venue? 5. Oval use. I believe at the moment the team isn't training at Gosch's because it's in a poor state. If it remains public land and free to use then there should at least be some kind of protections put in place. 6. AFLW? The ground should be developed with an intent to be able to host 5,000 people for AFLW games.

I see him as an important part of the backline and particularly good cover for Lever in an intercepting role but unless Lever comes back stronger and more aggressive in one on ones I don't think Frost/Lever is enough as the key talls. Maybe that smaller combination works, or maybe it's Petty or even Oscar, there's lots of ways to get a decent enough backline, but May's the only guy who has speed, strength, size and smarts to really build a backline around.

Can you win a premiership with: Option A: May, Lever and Frost down back. Tom McDonald, Weid, Melksham forward Option B: Frost, Lever, Petty? down back. Tom McDonald, May, Melksham forward I'd say it's yes to A and no to B. Goals are created by intercepts and turnovers. When you pressure a side in to a mistake and create a mismatch or open man. Good key defenders who don't allow mistakes or clean them up and the allow for or create intercepts up the ground save more goals than good forwards who struggle to get one on ones or mismatches create. If the Weid doesn't make it then we need a replacement (and we absolutely need depth) and we need to upgrade the outside run and skill, but at least in the short term we don't need to be making desperate changes to the key forward stocks.

If Hill was out of contract then we'd have to beat the other teams to be his preferred destination then work a deal with Freo. Given he's in contract he has far less leverage, he can't just blindly nominate anyone, has to agree to a club that will make Freo happy enough to give him up. That's how we got May last year. May was keen on the Pies, Hawks, Dogs and us but it became clear the only side that could make the Suns happy was us, so to get out of Gold Coast he went with us. Players nominate clubs when a deal is likely. My guess is that teams interested in Hill know they'll have to offer up something juicy like a future first rounder and only if they are willing to do that then Hill gets a bit more choice. Freo held the Gold Coast over a barrel for Lachie Weller, so they know how to work it. I think our lack of interest stems not just from Hill looking elsewhere (Hawks, Saints) but the asking price being substantial.

Our current wing options: Fritsch 69% kicking efficiency (KE), turnovers 3.8 Metres Gained 330 Score Involvements 3.8 Contested Possesion rate 31.7 C Wagner 60.5% KE turnovers 3.2 MG 193 SI 4 CP 40.3 Stretch 65.8 % DE turnovers 2.6 MG 268 SI 3.6 CP 33.1 Baker 61.7 % DE turnovers 4.2 MG 333 SI 3.5 CP 26.8 Not metioned: KK and Vanders - both chronic injuries Langdon 58.9% KE, turnovers 4.6 Metres gained 412 SI 4.1 Contested Possession rate 30.2 Brad Hill 60.3% turnover 5.2 MG 481 SI 5.8 Contested possessions 22.2 Is Langdon a good kick - no, is his kicking efficiency and turnover rate significantly worse than other guys in his position - no. Here's a list of wingmen who have a higher average metres gained than him this year: Whitfield, Hill, Henderson, Smith, Atkins, Robinson, Fiorini and just Polec. He's ahead of Tom Phillips, Sheed, McCluggage, Hunter, Billings, Seedsman, Duncan and so on. He won't solve all our problems but having a wingman who can cover off defensively and then run and get the ball moving will make life so much easier for our half backs and inside midfielders. His hard running at speed more than makes up for his kicking limitations and I really think he'd make a nice compliment for Fritsch and Baker as a wing/forward rotation.