deejammin'

To all those lamenting the potential loss of Gys who does he keep out of our midfield group? Jones, Trengove, Grimes, Viney, Pick 4, Sylvia, Mckensie, Blease, Taggert, Howe, Byrnes(rotation), Davey (potential rotation), Morton, Strauss, Jetta Here is my best 22 for next year: (given our current list) FB- Nicholson - Frawley - Garland HB- Watts - T McDonald- Ray(if we get him) or J Macdonald C- Blease - Jones - Sylvia HF- Howe - Dawes - Tapscott FF- Martin - Clark - Byrnes FOL- Jamar - Trengove - Grimes int- Viney - Wines - Mckensie - Davey or Dunn With the addition of Taggert, Bail, Rodan, Magner, Tynan, Strauss, Barry, Morton, Jetta and Petterd and Potentially Ray all pushing their case for selection which of all of these players will Gys keep out/be ahead of? Edit: Forgot Jetta and Petterd

While I am not totally sold on the Rodan inclusion I'm not exactly sure what it has to do with a potential trade to gain Gysberts for Pedersen. Secondly what did we lose for Rodan, pick 88? Which we weren't going to use, ouch! its something for nothing, think of him as being the extra player we gain through the updated Veterans list. Hardly a quick fix, more of a calculated risk.

Updated OP

Relieved others cleared this up before me. He does have good experience in finals in 2007, and he could be a good get if he plays his best footy. But in terms of his Grand Final experience he was on the end of the biggest GF flogging of all time!

Not nearly as happy with this one as all the other trades. Positive is we have basically given up nothing. Negative is we have to delist someone for him and I'm not sure its a sure bet he will be a better player than them. Hope to be proven wrong however. Welcome Mr Rodan I will give you all my support as you are now a demon.

I am getting really sick of people having such a one-eyed attitude to our players. Ray was a bounce of a ball away from a Premiership player, he played extremely well in a GF, has played in 3 GF total, he also played well for all 22 matches in a team that was undefeated for 3/4 of a season. He is also 26, in his prime, with at least 4 more years of service to go along with his good experience. Gysberts, although suffering from injury, has done nothing even close to any of those things and struggled to show anything against GC this year (who won how many games?) in the worst midfield in the league. Also those that say Gysberts has 3 years of development but excuse his poor performances on injuries are surely contradicting themselves, if his injuries have prevented him playing well surely that has hindered his development? Gysberts for Ray may suit you or not, but the rumour is not hateful, in my view that would be fair and Ray offers a lot more of what we need than Gys at this stage......

Actually this situation disadvantages any team that wants Tippett and can bid more than Sydney (in terms of payment to Adelaide) as in a fair system without this deal they would be able to get their man. Adelaide knows exactly what they will get and while it is not market value its nowhere near as bad as being a team that has bid a top ten draft pick only to be shot down for pick 23 and a dud. The teams disadvantaged would be Carlton, GWS, GC, Brisbane, Bulldogs and potentially even us. it also provides Sydney an unfair advantage as their ladder position would usually count them out of acheiving this sort of trade, where they will actually pick him up to add to their premiership team for next to nothing (comparitively). Imagine if Judd had a go home clause and West Coast had got pick 23 for him from Sydney at least Carlton had to give up something decent (despite their brown paper bagging)! For those mentioning the Ball situation this is still far worse, as any team coud have picked Ball up and made him sit on the pine for a year if that was his intent, while it was still draft tampering if a team had the cojones to pick Ball up the whole situation could have been avoided (I wish we did regardless of the consequences, it would have stopped the pies winning a flag!). Also cash being involved is a big no-no and will be a bigger issue than the draft rorting.

Its draft tampering if Adelaide has already pre-ordained what kind of a pick they will take for Tippet it makes it an unfair bidding process. If say Brisbane had said they would trade pick 9 for Tippett but Adelaide accepts 23 from Sydney due to a previous arrangement they are preventing a fair bidding process from taking place and Brisbane is unfairly disadvantaged. Also Tippett, while he can express where he wants to go, has no ultimate say, he is not an UFA, and when this deal was made there were no FA at all. A good comparison would be that if Mitch Clark had this kind of deal there would have been no way for Melbourne to get him as Brisbane would have to accept whatever pick Freo offer. It ultimately tampers with how a bidding process works to the detriment of the clubs as players will chose sucessful clubs and lesser clubs, who would usually have a higher draft pick bidding advantage are prevented from having so. Its salary cap breach because Tippett had undeclared income as a result of this deal outside Adelaide's salary cap.

It would seem Tippett at least made Sydney aware of the clause, otherwise why would they imagine they could trade for him? GC have all sorts of advantages, as do GWS and even Brisbane have better options for trade than Sydney, there is no way they would have imagined they could win a bidding war. This all seems very fishy, I hope somehow it works out in a way that helps us.

I rate Ray, I think he plays the perfect role for our team, and his performance in the drawn GF was top class. Also he has played well this year, albeit mainly in the VFL. Although his real value will be helping our young players develop, if he takes guys like Strauss under his wing and gets them to realise their potential he will be more than worth it regardless of what he does onfield.

Martin, Sellar, Fitzy, Clark (FF and Ruck), Garland and potentially even TMac are all currently on our list and can all play this role, to different levels of success admittedly, but Pedersen is no guarentee to be better than any of them. How many multi- Grand Finalist Half Back Flanks at 26 years of age with good attitude and experience do you think we can get? @Ralph: I agree, that type of experience is invaluable, and added to the experience of Byrnes and Dawes may show our players what it means to work like a successful outfit on the track. The only way we can pay overs IMO is to trade pick 4 which we obviously would never do, the players that have been listed for trade don't upset me too much (Martin, Gysberts, Petterd, Morton) if they result in us getting Ray.

With all due respect Ralph I'm very frustrated by this attitude that we paid "over market value" for Dawes. The Bulldogs offered what was then Pick 21 and a swap of later picks, we offered pick 20 and a swap of later picks, we literally offered one pick over our competition! That competition determines the market value, Dawes' value was determined by the competition we had for him, Brisbane offered a similar amount, the Bulldogs offered one pick less, this is the value, two years ago we couldn't get Dawes for pick 12! Market value fluctuates, if you want to assign an absolute value for every player that is your perogative and your opinion. Market value is what others are willing to pay for him, which we must beat to get his services. Also, I really want Ray, I think Pedersen is important if we trade Martin, otherwise he is neither here nor there. Ray would be a great get to rotate through the midfield off half back, the exact type of player we want, with an attitude that is great and who has played in a well-drilled successful side under one of the best current coaches. If we get him I will be very happy.

It does look like a good team, but I think your Backline is far too tall, even though Garland can play small I don't see Frawley, TMac, Watts, Garland and Pedersen all in the backline at once, its a bit top heavy, plus I think Pedersen would far more likely be playing forward. Here;s my suggestion. Assuming we get the wishlist in Pedersen and Ray (which is unfortunately looking increasingly unlikely) FB- Nicholson - Frawley - Garland HB- Watts - T MacDonald- Ray C- Blease - Jones - Sylvia HF- Howe - Dawes - Tapscott FF- Pedersen - Clark - Byrnes FOL- Jamar - Trengove - Grimes int- Viney - Wines - Mckensie - Davey (If he can rotate between HBF and Small Forward) (I want Davey in that team and in form I think he will be, also I want Wines and Viney to play round one but it is difficult to get them all in, Taggert will also get his chance so there will be a bit of competition for midfield spots this year)

I think I agree with most of what you have said. Certainly our 'Peter Pan' approach hasn't worked how we thought it would. It also hasn't worked for Carlton or Richmond in the way they thought it would when they started their complete rebuilds years before us. In fact I think you can argue strongly now that youth without strong senior players to guide them has been a largely failed strategy. I don't think the complete slash and burn approach Bailey took was the only option, I think we should have tried a more balanced approach. What I get out of the age comparison above is that MN is trying to build a more balanced list, not ignoring youth as some are suggesting, but trying to fill deficiencies in experience, player types and roles within the team on and off the field. I think it has been a promising approach and I think it makes a lot of sense, obviously there is never any way to be certain that you will be successful, there are 18 teams going for the same thing. However I am excited by our recent trades and the two ones I have mooted above and I think that we should expect to be a far more competitive team than last year if Clark, Dawes, Byrnes and Ray can get on the park for the majority of games.

I would love this to happen, but I really doubt it. If we get Ray for 49 + Bennell thats a great trade for us. I would say we only trade Martin if we are guaranteed Pedersen, if not, Martin gets another shot.

Thanks LH, I hope not, I prefer to think that Denham can't read! Anyway I also wanted to add that Sydney had 9 players in their GF team over 29, thats just the 22, not the entire list! Also Hawthorn had at least 6 over 28. So that shows just how deficient we are in experienced players!

I think this has needed to be posted for awhile in the context of both our drafting and list management. 18-21 (New recruits): Davis, Blease, Gawn, TMac,Taggert, Tapscott, Trengove, Tynan, Watts, Viney, Toumpas (!!!!), Barry, Hogan, Kent, Evans. 22-25 (Established players): Bail, Clark, Dunn, Fitzy, Frawley, Garland, Grimes, Howe, Jetta, Jones, Jordie, Sellar, Spencer, Strauss, Dawes, Pedersen, Nicholson, Gillies, M Jones, Terlich. 26-28(Senior Players): JMac, Sylvia, Byrnes, 29+(Veterans): Davey, Jamar, Rodan. Bold: New Looking at our list at this stage of the trade period I think Neeld's mindset becomes clear. The vast majority of our list (particularly with the exits of Rivers, Moloney, Green and Jurrah) are in the first two groups, with only 5 players pre our new ins over 26. It should also be noted that of those players over 26, only 2 have really cemented their spots in the 22 in 2012 (Jamar and Sylv and thats still debatable). The vast majority of the quality on our list is in the age group between 22-25, with more entering over the next couple of years (Trenners, Watts and Blease for example). But in the key 26-28 age group, where I would argue most players are hitting their peak we only have 3 players with 2 famously inconsistant and JMac, who we could debate the quality of. Clearly our list is deficient in this region and even with several good players entering this age group over the next couple of years it is clear it needs to be bolstered. Clearly we have plenty of talent in the younger region of our list and this will be bolstered with at least 4 young recruits this year. I am sure multiple conclusions can be drawn from this, and sure the age groups are arbitrary and I haven't guessed at the delistings, but I think it has needed to be posted as I feel it would answer a lot of the concerns given in several threads. Obviously we are actually adding more youth than anything else in this draft so those like Cam Mooney who argue we aren't continuing to add quality to the young end of our list are way off the mark. But in Byrnes, Ray and Dawes (who will be 25 next year) we have added 3 experienced players who have come from quality cultures, experienced success and are equally as good, if not better than most of our current experienced players. Edited to include Rodan, also in this context Rodan makes far more sense as he adds to an age and experience group we have very little in. Edited to include delistings, Pedersen and trades (Gys, Morton). Edited to include upgraded Rookies and Gillies. Edited to include draft Edit: For all the talk during trade period of "not adding enough youth" we have now added 6 players under 22 to our primary list along with 4 over 25. Seems pretty balanced to me. Also the depth of this list is looking better and better, there are far fewer in the team that I can't see getting an AFL game than when we started. Also with at least 5 (Dawes, Jones, Pedersen, Clark, Frawley, Jones) high quality players moving into the "Senior player" age group over the next 2 years this list is starting to look more and more competitive, rather than developmental.

Read this article by one of the most respected post-season and draft analysts in the Age: Three win in mini-draft It is not tampering, it is within the rules, it is smart, and it worked out for every party involved. QED

With regards to bidding on Viney my source is the numerous members of the press and football community that agree that for Viney to slip to 26(7) involved a 3 way deal between GWS, GC and MFC involving Hogan, Barry, Martin and many draft picks. You suggest we offer 4 for Hogan, which gives our FD so little credence, there is no way we didn't offer 4 first as part of that 3 way deal, it obviously wasn't enough, and in that deal if we insult one of the other 2 they bid on Viney. This is widely known in the greater football community, if you wish to deny it, do so, it says more about you than anything else. Many Phantom drafts had Barry going in the 30s, there is no guarantee he would have got to that pick. In my view it is unlikely. Collingwood would never have excepted Martin or one of our "rejects" as you call them over Bulldogs pick 22 and a swap of later picks, which is what they offered. The only way we get Dawes in your scenario is to trade pick 14, which negates your net gain, makes Barry far more risky, potentially has us taking Viney at 3 when GWS and GC rejected the offer of pick 4 as part of the Viney deal. Your scenario to me sees us potentially losing Hogan, taking Viney at 3, not getting Barry, either not getting Dawes or taking him with pick 14 and has us taking far more risks on getting the type of players we want in the draft.

Fine, looks like its my turn to bite on one of your posts. 1. That would now be pick 14, 2. Your order could never have happened that way as GC or GWS would have bid on Viney 3. There's no guarentee that GC or GWS having had us refuse to deal on a Viney bid would have offered Barry at all, and its possible they may have considered other offers on Hogan. Best case scenario in your world: Viney (Pick 3), Hogan (Pick 4), Pick 14, 26 (would probably not been enough for Dawes as the Bulldogs would offer 21 (now 22)) I'll take what the footy department has done any day!

My biggest one was Nathan Carroll, thought he would hold down a key back spot for a decade after that tackle on Gehrig.......

I think this is a great and interesting point. Between needing to develop younger players like TMac and Watts, having an AA fullback in Frawley and other players like Garland, Sellar, Dunn and potentially Martin all fighting for a spot the MFC backline would have been hotly contested for Riv next year, at Geelong with Scarlett gone he's a walk-up start.

Taking into account what Neeld has said about players like Watts and Dawes' roles here is what I think we have so far: KP Backs: Frawley, Tmac, Garland, Watts, Utilities/Depth: Dunn, Sellar, Martin, KP Forwards: Clark, Dawes, Fitzpatrick, Its a hell of a lot better than last year but we really could use Pedersen as a KPF/Ruck. Then we have 4 potential KPD and KPF with 2/3 Utilities. Thats pretty good competition for spots and dare I say it, almost good depth......... Anyway, it certainly shows how well Dawes will impact our list.

Must win game. Thats all.

Good luck Riv, would have loved for you to stay, but best of luck at the cats. PS. I think you have made a bad decision as the Cats will have to fight hard to play finals footy this year with Carlton, Richmond, Essendon and St Kilda pushing them all the way. Also for those that thought one of the issues Neeld had to fix was our leadership only Aaron Davey remains of the 2010 leadership group.