DeeSpencer

Yeah he was solid. He's nothing special athletically or by foot but where he is a step above a few of our guys is he understands pressure and tackling and he is creative with his hands. Sydney's another step above North, so I'll watch again. Agree that I can't see him leaving, although Menzel and Milera are 2 AFL quality half forwards sitting on the Crows list and they need an A grade midfielder. Lyons might be one who's put up by the Crows.

He's been unfortunate not to get a longer run at it but has had a few chances this year and simply isn't quick or skilled enough to play half back (or half forward) at AFL level. Given that he hasn't been picked as a midfielder for a while now and there's no sign that will change I think he's high up on the list of guys to go. I just don't see it with Grimes either but I guess time will tell.

Tuohy is a very good footballer, Carlton need draft picks and North seem keen to reload not rebuild. Interesting choice but if they zig where all other clubs zag that might stay as a top 8 team, not sure how they win the flag though. Hrovat is very similar to Ben Kennedy. Not sure we'd need him. Doesn't use the ball well enough to keep a regular spot. Hartung would be better for list balance I think. He'd give us an extra outside runner that we really need. Henderson would be a great get, but I can't see us adding Henderson and Hibberd with Melksham returning. That's spending a lot of currency on back flankers, unless the belief was Henderson could play as a 3rd tall and I'm not convinced of that.

Tempted to tip the Panthers but I think I'll just enjoy watching the first game. From a better point of view the Pats with a 6 point spread seems generous even with Jimmy G. A fired up Belichick after a full offseason of preparation can work some magic there and at least keep it close.

I think 55's delistings/FA were all pretty reasonable. Which of the following do you have a problem with: Possibly delistable depending on who comes in: Pedersen, M.Jones, White (R) Tradeable: Dunn, Garland, Kennedy-Harris, Neal-Bullen, Harmes, Wagner (R) I'd say Pedersen and Matt Jones are just depth, if we had someone for free who was better to fill the same positions we'd move them on. Mitch White probably gets another year but with Hibberd and Melksham back if we were to find another back flanker he'd go. Trading one of Dunn and Garland makes sense. I expect Wagner gets promoted to the senior list with a 1-2 year deal or at least retained as a rookie, he's not going anywhere. I doubt the other 3 in Harmes, ANB and JKH are going anywhere, but they are the type of players who you'd listen to trade offers for. The latter 2 might even seek trades although we've heard little from them and I hope they stay. Yes Grimes, Michie, Newton probably go from Casey, but Spencer, Matt Jones, ANB, JKH, Harmes, Trengove, Kennedy probably form the basis of Casey's midfield next year. Weideman, Hulett and both King's played a lot for Casey this year. They'll be a year older next year. So you might lose a little from the midfield but gain in other spots. The Trengove contract told me that the footy club is certainly interested in keeping leadership, culture and strong VFL performances.

I tend to agree, but at the same time the old adage about never having enough good players does apply a bit. And whilst his ideal position is probably half forward/on ball and he doesn't give us the goal kicker, speed or skills we really need he's flexible enough to do a bit of everything. If we did have injuries next year he'd be the kind of quality depth that actually helps you weather the storm, compared to some of the others you've named. Our culture and list is a lot healthier now but we are also going to cut a few older guys come delistings this year and we'll need a bit of experience coming in (Hibberd, Melksham aside) to make sure we don't slip back in to being a development team and not training and competing for spots. It's a big finals series for him. Don't want to judge him too much on 1, 2 or 3 games but if he stands up in finals then I think he could be someone worth going harder for. I don't think Bugg and Kennedy are guys who would hold a regular spot in a top team, where Lyons has done that so far this year. If he looks like he can bring that form to finals then he'll catch my interest.

Not sure he and Garlett could play in the same side. Both small, one dimension forward pockets. So I'd rather stick with the one we have for now rather than take a list spot when we've got a lot of other needs.

10-15 games of NDS v Matt Jones. I'll take the chance on Dal Santo. If not, we stick with Matt Jones for one last year.

We are building a contested ball side without massive endurance at this stage so I'd say it probably doesn't help. We want numbers and contested footy. On the other hand: 1. We are also building a strong midfield, getting more options across half back who can run and play in space as well as the prospect of Hogan, Weideman, Watts, Petracca forward. If we can defend one on one better and move the ball to dangerous forwards then the less players on the ground the better. 2. If we get the development right of our kids, particularly the bunch drafted over the last few years then the less players on the field at the same time the better. Gawn, Hogan, Petracca, Oliver, Viney, Tyson, Stretch, Watts, Weideman, McDonald, Hunt, Brayshaw, Salem. That's 13 guys. Get them all to their potential in 3 years and that's most of a side. The Saints in 09-10 would've won both grand finals without 2 spuds on the field.

He had a few games he was beaten, fair enough, true of all players. He certainly has as many big games as any others. I think he's been marked harshly for games where he beat up on bad rucks without huge influence around the ground. Seems stiff.

Removes the considerable incentive to hide them, which I think is fair for everyone involved.

Teddy: 65.3% 3231 yards, 14TD, 9 INT, 44 sacks, 88.7 Rtg Bradford: 65% 3725 yards 19 TD, 14 INT, 28 sacks, 86.4 Rtg I think Bradford can play as well as Teddy did last year and in a similar style. Obviously a run heavy offense takes down his number of attempts,, but with more weapons this year the Vikings might open things up a bit. The big questions will be whether he can stay healthy and whether he's good enough to do what's needed to win big games. Teddy last year was good but probably needed to improve to win play off games. That's probably the same level Bradford is at unless the Vikings defense goes to the next level or two.

After watching Hard Knocks I've got a bit more respect for Fisher. Or at least let me put it this way, I understand why he keeps his job and finishes with 7 or 8 wins. He seems competent and certainly isn't Mark Neeld level of crud. That said he must surely be running out of time very soon. Goff's preseason was rough and I think he was overdrafted by going number 1. I remember watching him against a decent Utah defense last year and they picked him off at will and he didn't play in a pro style offense. That said, I'm still a fan of his. He makes all the throws. He's got the temperament. He's physically gifted. I don't think sitting him for a few games/few months/the whole year even will do him any harm.

Welcoming myself back for a new season. And the Vikings go bang and trade something decent for Sam Bradford. Big move. Seems like they don't want to waste the year. Probably good news for the Eagles as well. Bradford made no sense on that roster.

Seriously? Petracca has freakish talent with his vision and can spear the ball and kick with great penetration, but he's far from a good kick and no where close to Watts or someone like Hartlett. Petracca drops the ball from too high and thumps it using his burly frame, it doesn't compare to someone like Hartlett (or Watts or Salem) who have pure kicking actions. He needs a big preseason working on his kicking technique and composure to improve his disposal. And his set shot kicking is atrocious, his action doesn't stand up under pressure.

Perfectly reasonable. I'd suggest both Collingwood and us would be asking around Gold Coast and GWS to get back in to the first round. Gold Coast also have a top 5 rated academy kid and you can't pay for them with a bunch of cheap picks this year. So they'll probably look to trade up with Essendon or Brisbane and will surely look to trade picks back to next year. As an alternative to getting pick 8 we might have to gamble with getting picks 21 and 23 from them, sending one for Essendon to overpay for Hibberd as is our wont, and then having 2 top 30 picks this year if we favour getting in more depth of talent instead of another top 10 pick. Early days but I'm not a huge wrap for the top 10 in this draft and we need depth of talent so it might be a good idea.

Like Richmond, hasn't really played well since late 2013. Isn't quick or skillful enough to play outside. Doesn't win enough of it inside So is really just a rotation guy from half forward through the middle Struggles with injury Maybe take a chance on him for free instead of Matt Jones. Maybe.

Marchbank got roasted by Hogan in round 23 last year and again when Davis went off in round 1 this year and his kicking hasn't looked all the great to me. He's shorted than ideal although has good athleticism, and he was drafted higher than expected due to GWS having the luxury of 3 top 10 picks that year (and every year). I think his draft position impacts his value and if he was taken at the start of the 2nd round then combined with the injuries he wouldn't be rated as highly. I'd have him over Oscar but I'm not convinced there's all that much difference, I think they've both got similar pros and cons. Good athletes, good marks, not amazing physically at this stage which is to be expected. I woudn't risk dealing our 2017 first rounder on him given that could be pick 5-8 and without involving that we don't have the currency. I'd be training/playing Hulett as a key defender next year and seeing if he could be a similar player and/or picking up a tall back in the 3rd or 4th round this year. Hard to find ones with elite footskills or intercept marking (and nearly impossible to find ones with both) but a decent prospect should be available.

One reason Clarko is a genius is because he's trained up a fleet of flexible players whilst also creating a lot of set roles and patterns of play that disguise limitations of players. Puopolo, Breust, McEvoy, Frawley, there's plenty who have simple jobs and excel at parts of the game plan. Vickery is 26 so he's young enough to find a bit of improvement, young enough to find a bit in the body whilst old enough to have AFL fitness under his belt. He's 200cm so he can pinch hit in the ruck. He's big and strong enough to attack the ball as a deep forward. He'll do all of that and with better training, fitness, standards etc he'll probably do it well. Most importantly he's a free agent so if the compo is right and Richmond don't match he'll be free! That means the Hawks can spend big on Mitchell or O'Meara and don't have to worry about replacing Roughy or Ceglar for the year. The Hawks since about 2010 have been the masters of spending big on blue chip prospects and finding what they need elsewhere for budget price. That's where Vickery fits.

Out: Terlich, Grimes, Dawes, Newton, Michie (r), Max King (r) Possible: Matt Jones, Mitch White (r) Trade out: 1 of Garland or Dunn (take your pick) Rookie promotion: Wagner Trade in: Hibberd Main list spots: 4 - 3rd round pick, 4th round pick, delisted free agent, PSD/extra rookie Rookie list spots: 3 Train on: Matt Jones - depending on draft/free agents we might need an experienced outside runner. Could be rookied or go on the main list depending on list space Mitch White - needs to do a lot of speed work, could stay on but cutting him might give us flexibility Max King - if he got fit he's got a lot of talent, worth keeping him training if he came back in shape in November could be re rookied

I'm split on him, but does the age of a list clogger matter? I mean if you're a list clogger by definition you probably won't get better, almost certainly you'll be 23+, if you're 24 or 29 who cares? In fact I'd probably rather the 29 year old for some life experience and leadership.

I think he's soft as butter but he kicked a stack of goals in his first year in the VFL then hasn't got any better. A speedy 2nd ruck ala Josh Jenkins would really suit us as we could play that player alongside Hogan, Weid and Watts, but I don't think McBean is AFL quick nor does he have much by the way of defensive pressure. Don't think he's up to it.

I'd want to know what Lennon's endurance is like. If he has (or can build) a big tank he could play like Adelaide's Tom Lynch and follow a similar development path. If he can't run then I'm not convinced he has the physicality, speed or strength to be all that special a player and even if Richmond's a basket case I'm not a huge fan of players who sign 2 year deals only to them do a dummy spit a year later. If I were Richmond and the best he's worth now is a mid to late 2nd rounder and he'll be worth a 3rd rounder next year then I'm taking the gamble on keeping him for a year.

And a truckload more goals. If goal kicking was Butcher's only problem he'd play regularly. He doesn't have a lot of smarts, skills, defensive pressure or speed to be useful aside from taking grabs and having shots on goal. The only way I'd be interested in him would be if there was a belief that he could be above average as a back up ruck and bring physicality and impact in that role to counter his ordinary conversion as a forward.

Starting inside mids: Jones, Viney, Tyson, Oliver, Brayshaw Depth: ANB, Trengove Rotation mids: Petracca, Salem, Kennedy, Vandenberg, Harmes If Melksham and Hibberd do the job at half back then Vince can also go back in the midfield as a tagger/experienced big body accumulator Do we take Barlow or Scott Thompson for experienced depth if they are free to a good home? I wouldn't say no, but I wouldn't rush out and do it either. Wait and see how the rest of the list is shaping before adding one of these guys.