Benny & The Jett

And I wasn't saying that you were - I wasn't disputing anything. I was just remarking that a no-frills game from him still gets four goals so when he he has a day out it should double. FWIW I don't expect him to dominate games but I think that he could easily kick a 3+ average per game no matter the defender. 66+ goals a year sounds good to me.

haha..

Not sure about that, but i understand where you're coming from..He's very exciting and he doesn't need a lot of opportunities to convert goals..I just think that its going to be a tougher challenge for him when the 'real' stuff starts, he's going to have to work harder to get involved in the game further up the field, because the opposition will wear him like a glove after last year's exploits..

Didn't play poorly by any means, it's just that I wouldn't read too much into the fact he slotted 4 today..

RE: Yze_Magic

It's not a personal attack..and if you're so sure of your stance why did you delete your own post?

Seriously, is there any other Melbourne supporter who thinks that after a 'grand total of 3 AFL games' that Jack Watts is a lost cause?? That he'll never reach the standards of Naitanui, a bloke who couldn't hit a target by foot 30 metres away if his life depended on it??

A lazy four. I'll take that. Should translate into a good 6 or 7 when the real games begin.

I'm not saying he had a poor game, just thought the above poster was being pedantic.

The original point that was made was essentially correct. He kicked a couple goals early, then a couple late..but didn't really have a significant impact..boom.

You don't get to play against fringe and VFL listed players when the real stuff starts either..

1> Jurrah: Didn't see him do alot kicked two late goals which helped his side win. - Hmmm... Kicked four mate! Was the pie queue a bit long?

He didn't do an awful lot. Kicked 4 goals, but they were all front-running type goals. Seriously didn't do that much around the ground mate, bit pedantic tbh..

We saw how he goes against a proper outfit when Jamar dismantled NicNat last year. I was embarrassed for him.

It's funny how short people's memories are..

Jamar, a 'mid-level' AFL ruckman absolutely destroyed Naitanui. It would have been truly embarrassing for Nic if he hadn't have been a 1st year player.

Funny how no one made a big deal of that..but apparently Watts is a hack after 3 AFL senior appearances, so go figure...

Trengove is going to be the best midfielder for this next decade.

How good was he??

It's hard to say what 'such-and-such' a player will achieve at such an early stage, but even the most novice of football observer's could tell Trengove's the real deal..

Shouldn't discount Scully though. I think Jack's a tad more advanced 'physically' at this stage, which is helping him compete against the senior players.. but..Tom Scully will be just as good as Trengove in due course..

Bloody exciting times ahead!

did strauss play??

thanks for the updates guys!

Yeah, but was on and off the ground i think. Fairly inocuous game, gave away a few frees, made some nice passes. Still looks a bit green for mine at senior level..

I think he needs a good, injury free run at VFL level before progressing to seniors..He's such a good kick & decision maker its ridiculous..

Just needs some continuity in getting games together at VFL level for mine before progressing..

The thought of having Strauss and Bennell operating out of defence is an exciting prospect imo...

petterd did some good things but he has a shocking kick

I agree. Thought he might have improved in his 4th preseason. Still can't hit the side of a barn door.

Was excited about the skillful display by Jamie Bennell tbh.. Looks a steal at pick 35..Jordie McKenzie should get a run ahead of Lynden Dunn imo, MacDonald impressed enough in the 1st half to suggest he ought to be a fixture in the back half..Cheney was 'tidy' with his disposal and should probably get the nod as well. Trengove is a walkup start for r1 and will be an absolute 'superstar' of the game..

Peter Siddle was at the ground with a few mates. Should be back in training in about a month...

As well as Naitanui played last night, he is still an average kick at this stage. He looks to handball at every opportunity because he has little confidence in his kicking..No doubt he's a terrific prospect, but Jack will be a star in his own right, and possibly better given 'TIME'...

Watts 'will' reach Riewoldt's level in time & clowns like you will be made to eat their words. He will be a premier KPF in 5 years time, but I guess that's too long for the goldfish brain crowd to wait..

Lets just remember that we demonlanders and ology people plus a few thousand Demon supporters are the only people really watching the Club over the last 3 years.

To everyone else in the Footy world we are a joke and a waste of space.

I have heard it repeatedly. Opposition supporters are waiting for us to go Belly Up.

We are not rated at all.

And why should we be. Do any of us Rate the Tigers? i would suggest not.

He may be an idiot on TV but Crawf did win a charlie and got to play in a premiership team.

This Club is heading in the right direction but still has not put the scores on the board.

It all starts this year...show the article to the players..let them prove crawf wrong, not just in round 1 either.

We're going to beat some good sides this year, and Crawford's opinions are driven mainly by what he thinks will sell papers, and not by any kind of 'truth' or good judgement.

I bet you, if you asked him to name 18 current Melbourne players, he couldn't do it..

"drafted AMONG the best" I should have said.

Well the article says that we were judged #1 by this study. We had 2 very good years (where we nailed our 1st round choices) and 2 quite mediocre ones imo (2006 was also a strong draft, so we should've picked well...)

I'd say off the top of my head, we've performed a bit better than average for the competition in the period. Probably around 5th-8th for the picks we've had. Certainly not #1..

Bate, Morton, Grimes, Frawley, Garland are all terrific talents. I'd say we're probably top 4 or 5 of all teams in the players we've brought in over the period, but not #1 in terms of success in using our picks overall, which I assume is the point of the study..

Your argument depends on your definition of the bolded section.

If you mean we brought the best talent into the club of any other team, then we have drafted the best.

If you mean we've managed to draft the best young talent in relation to which picks we had, then it is debatable.

I'd say the former is only relevant for this thread.

I meant to say that if he reckons we've drafted the best of any club between 2004-2007 'relative' to draft selection's then he's got it wrong. Adelaide have outperformed us relative to draft 'selections', and i am sure there are others.

06 & 07 were strong drafts for us, but we did have 4 picks inside the top 21 (or 3 of top 15) for those 2 years..I also doubt whether we've even brought in the 'best' talent overall in that period regardless of the picks..Despite having strong drafts in 06 & 07.

It is a crock, but it doesn't necessarily say our players aren't up to standard.

It is an indicator of our dearth of competent senior players over the last 3 or 4 years.

Whether the young players were up to scratch or not is not relevant or indicated - they had to play.

The senior players are an issue, but as I said previously, just look at some of the players Adelaide have brought in during the same period, and to see how important they've been in their recent success.

The crows did not have a selection higher than pick #8, they even mucked up two of their 1st round picks with speculative talls that didn't work out, so it could've been even better.

I honestly don't think the likes of Dunn, Newton, Buckley, Bartram, Neville, Weetra, etc. would've been any better off at stronger clubs.

I'd say only Frawley, Garland, Morton and Grimes (sorry Bate as well!) are absolute 'sure things' as quality AFL players to be picked from this period (of the main Draft selections), and 4 of them were 1st rounders...I mean how Jack Grimes slipped to 14 is anyone's guess. He was rated by more than a few good judges as a top 5 selection. We got lucky there, I would've picked him if I was in Craig Cameron's chair...

Our recruiting between 06'-09' will look very good in 5 years time, but we've also had a heap of early selections to work with so it ought to look good..

What an idiotic response.

No, you're right. A dose of reality is exactly what we don't need.

Come on...

I'm all for enthusiasm, but not based on flimsy theories that don't stand up to a bit of common sense.

I agreed 100% with what you said in the previous comment...

In the six drafts from 2000-2005 we drafted 24 players. At present that group represents a total of FOUR good players (Jones, Bate, Sylvia and Rivers) you can throw in McLean and Thompson and call them Gysberts and Moloney. Luckily we got Davey, Ozzie, Martin and Warnock through rookie/PSD. Pretty bloody awful return. This is why we've been the worst side in the last 3 years.

That's a good point. The 2000-2003 drafting has probably exacerbated the problem. But I still cannot accept that our drafting over 04-07 has been the best in the comp as the study suggests.

06 & 07 have been very good recruiting years for us. 04-05 were just average.

Therefore, we're probably middle of the road for the period...

Adelaide drafted the likes of Van Berlo, Knights, Vince, Porplyzia, Tippett, Mackay, Dangerfield, Otten, and Taylor Walker in the same period, only 1 was a 1st round pick (Dangerfield p#10 07').

How they didn't even make the top 3 i'll never know..

Performance is judged based on indicators such as games played.

Which is why it is a total crock. How that equation is seen to be an indicator of anything is anyone's guess.

All it proves is that we've been giving far too many senior AFL games to players who are 'not' up to standard..

Are you serious? You have named 2 late first round picks, a couple of late 2nd round / early third round, 4th round and rookie picks. How terrible that none of them have gone on... mind you, you have picked out the failures rather than the successes. For example you can not bag the recruiters for dunn without including Bate in the equation and in any case you can not bag Dunn unless there are lots of picks after him in that draft that are better. In my opinion he at least would get regular games at numerous other AFL games so that is hardly a failure.

Just some maths close to 100 players are picked up every year from the draft. At any point in time each list has 46 players on it (including rookies) That gives us 700 players in the AFL. Taking away players from the last three years.... you are left with about 450 player with more than three years experience. Good players play for 10+ years. That means that only 45 out the 100+ selected every year actually makes it.

Over half of all players selected do not make it. That means our recruiting in 04 and 05 is probably pretty good and will set us up for the future.

Yes mate I am deadly serious. If you're that one-eyed that your happy to buy that piece of candy story then that's your problem.

I have no idea about the researcher's methodology, but if he reckons we've drafted the best between 2004-2007 then he's deluded..

Anyone can spot a first round pick, even you probably. The great skill in recruiting is in nailing your selections 'after' the 1st round, and aside from 2006, we've got very little out of our picks 'after' the 1st round..

How does that make us the no. 1 team in the competition for recruiting between 04-07'??..Absolute bollocks.

I guess our 'outstanding' performance at the draft table in 2004 & 2005 really set us up nicely for winning back to back 'wooden spoons' in 08' & 09'..

We've won 11 games in 3 years and we've been the best team at the Draft table since 2004. Ridiculous.

Hmmm...What about Dunn, Newton, Simon Buckley, Bartram, Heath Neville, Weetra??

McNamara, Maric, Martin, Cheney have yet to confirm that they were good picks.

I think 04 & 05' were just 'average' for us in terms of recruiting. Not sure about that proclamation..

It's our 06-09 drafting that's got me excited about possible future success. I think we've absolutely nailed it in these years..

Exactly. Crawf is an attention seeker, hence his claim the doggies will win the flag. He's taken a different stance to get noticed.

Beyond that there is nothing insightful or clever in that article; it looks like it has been written with the bare minimum of effort.

Yeah, it does actually sound like he's throwing a number of curveballs just to distinguish himself from popular opinion.

As far as i'm concerned,

1. St. Kilda are flag favourites.

2. Geelong are 'still' a top 4 side.

3. Collingwood even with Jolly, are probably not a top 4 side..(St. Kilda, Geelong, Bulldogs, Hawthorn, and Adelaide are ahead IMO)

4. Cooney will probably not win the Brownlow

5. Melbourne will not be fighting out the wooden spoon with Richmond

Probably couldn't get a feature article out of that, but at least its closer to the truth.

Crawford's assessment based on what?? 30 minutes of a single training session?? Give me a break...

The fact he rates Freo higher than us shows he has no idea..

You also have to factor in that our improvement will come from our talented youngsters getting games, kids not necessarily 'standing out' at training just yet... A number of them will show rapid improvement throughout the year, and this, combined with good performances from our senior players will see us winning games..

Our skills aren't great at the moment, but when you consider the fact that highly skilled players like Trengove, Scully, Grimes, Bennell, Strauss, Blease, Gysberts, Tapscott and Maric will become more prominent, the overall skill level will increase.

I think we can finish around 11-12th. That's about what we 'should' be aiming for.

If we were fighting out the woodenspoon with Richmond i'd have serious concerns..

I did a bit of research on the Port forums. They seem to think with Rodan and both the Burgoynes gone, that Broadbent is a shoe in for either midfield or HBF time, and will likely play all year from Round 1.

Moore is abit of a punt. They're split on whether he will make the Round 1 team, but think he will get games this year, it's a matter of how early. The forward rookies are the worst part of this year, so it's going to have to be abit of pick and hope work I think. There are basically unlimited mid rookies, a few back rookies, but forwards are stuffed >

That's true. I think there's too many good mifield rookie options, and not enough elsewhere. Some of them should be made dual position or moved to another zone to balance things up. James Strauss for instance is listed as a mid, but he's played a lot across half back in his junior career. In fact, when I saw him at Casey, he's played deep in defence. So he should really be a defener or defender/midfielder imo.

You might want to consider the pre-season form of these 'forward rookies/cheapies..

Tom Rockliff (Bris) $101,100

Scott Gumbleton (Ess)$94,500

Lewis Johnstone (Syd) $94,500

Thanks, I think I'll try Tippett. Now on the search for the bargain backman! adventures plus.

What do people think of Matt Maguire for 101,000?

Wouldn't touch Matt Maguire with a 20 ft pole tbh mate. Ridiculously injury prone, and was never a good DT performer anyway when he was fit..He's likely to send you in to regular fits of 'despair' if you select him...

Go for youth at that sort of price..

My team (which will likely wind up completely different by the time it starts )

I've finished Top 1000 the last 2 years with a few weeks in the Top 10 here and there. The key is picking the right rookies/cheapies to get both points and cash.

Generally I dont bother with mid-priced players unless they're really underpriced coming back from an injury. Good example of this is Rhys Palmer this year. He's underpriced and would make you 100k while netting you 80 points a week. Problem is he just had a hiccup with his knee and is now not expected back until Round 5-6. It's a risk you take when you pick them, but hopefully it pays off.

I still believe the most important part is picking the right rookies, so you'll wind up with more cash to upgrade, and have a team full of superstars by the end.

Backs

Enright

Kelly

Hodge

Waite

Broadbent

Ladson

Hunt

(Sheppard, Davis)

Centres

Ablett (captain)

Vince (vice captain)

Thompson

Cooney

Trengove

Martin

(Scully, Cunnington)

Rucks

Sandilands

Tippett

(Warnock, Lobbe)

Forwards

Sylvia

Pavlich

Giansiracusa

Franklin

Ziebell

Dangerfield

Moore

(Dennis-Lane, Tapscott)

Looking good mate!!

Only real queries would be on Broadbent and Moore. I've heard good things about both, and I think Port will give opportunities to youngsters, but I reckon Brad Sheppard would be a safer bet as a 'starting' defender. I'm just unsure whether Moore & Broadbent will play from R1. If they play well in NAB Cup and look like getting a good run in the seniors, i think they'll be good value.

The rookies are key, but also have a close look at 2nd year players like Broadbent, who didn't play last year to have an impact. Some 'real' value in the 2nd year players this season imo...

Guys,

Feedback on my team would be great. I know my rucks are a little sh!t but its because I don't trust Cox and who knows with the others. Here it is:

Backs

Goddard

Grimes

Mackie

Harbrow

Ladson

Schoenmakers

Hurley

Centres

Gibbs

J.Selwood

C.Morton

Beams

Palmer

Scully/Trengove

Rucks

Tippett

Naitnui

Forwards

Riewoldt

Higgins

Didak

Franklin

Medhurst

Wonaeamirri

Tom lynch/T

Hey Freak!

Your team's looking pretty damn solid mate. You've got the right idea with the defenders, but if i was being 'really' picky i might question 3 or 4 of the 22 (also, who are the bench players??).

1stly - Ryan Schoenmakers...I think he's an absolute talent. But from a DT perspective, i'm concerned at this stage, that he might be used in more of a 'negating' role.

From what i've heard, the Hawks are trying to develop him as a replacement for Croad at CHB, which means he'll spend more time defending than attacking (which equates to average DT scores).. I'd watch him in the NAB cup games to see if that is in fact his role. He's cheap, but i don't see him improving much DT wise if he's playing CHB.

2ndly - Nic Naitanui...Big risk as a 1st choice ruck due to the Dean Cox factor, and the fact he's like a green colt that keeps shifting toward the grandstand in the last 100 metres..He's still got a long way to go before he becomes a consistent DT scorer. Personally, i'd be looking for more 'proven' players in the ruck position. I personally think Sandilands is a safebet, because he's 1 metre taller than any one else (so he wins all the hit outs without even trying!!) Plus he gathers the ball with ease around the ground..Robbie Warnock from Carlton might be another to look at, as he should take the no.1 ruck mantle with Kreuzer set to play forward this year..

3rdly - Tom Lynch...This guy will be a good AFL player, and a quality DT player given time. He's yet to play a senior game in a team that is very strong and stable. If he does play, he's unlikely to play week-in-week-out..i'd look elswhere tbh, unless he is prominent in the NAB CUp and looks like getting a game R1.

The cheap & talented 'young' players to go for imo, are the one's in 'weaker' sides, cause you know they'll be given opportunities. My query with Lynch is about 'opportunities', and whether or not he'll get them in such a strong side..

Apart from that, your side looks very good..

Also you should be prepared to ride the ups & downs of having Buddy in the team.. You'll get 140 dt points one week, and 50 dt points the next. As long as it averages out to about 95-100 you should be happy! I like having players that score well 'consistently', so that might be something else to keep in mind...