Dees_In_October

A lot of talk on the other side of the board about the club's social media efforts and the improved content of late. Great to see it carried through for both sets of draftees. Molly handled it all really well. Plus it showed what we already know about the quality of our coaches and leaders. The welcome by the players at the end of the night was a random end to a bit of whirlwind!

I'm guessing they meant 'high ceiling' but completely bungled it. Maybe they thought a glass ceiling was even higher than a high ceiling.

Sounds good to me!

I thought there might have been some purpose to this that I was missing! If there was no agreement, could it have been sort of on principle or because we could? I'd like to think we wouldn't go against an agreement, so maybe there wasn't one. Anyway, I'm just trying to understand the process better but maybe no answer to this one!

Found this article, which suggests it's more a "wait and see" on Aimee's recovery (she's about 7 months post ACL), not quite so definitive as what the draft coverage suggested. https://www.irishnews.com/sport/uncertainty-over-mackin-sisters-aflw-involvement-for-2025-IRVIYLI43BB6PHX3AMFWR35CDM/ The coverage also implied that we had an extra draft spot because of Aimee not returning. But we already had three spots available for draftees anyway. From my understanding, Aimee's list spot could only be filled with a draftee if she was delisted, which is not the case. For both Mackins, as mentioned in the article, there's the Gaelic season to consider as well. Finals run through July, with the All-Ireland Final at the start of August, and AFLW starting the week of August 11.

Nice to have draftees who are friends as well. Important for young ones!

Is it sort of an unspoken agreement that clubs won't do that with a pick traded in like that? Just trying to understand why it was a surprise and what the purpose was.

Absolutely, I meant that more positively than it came out!

Spot on, and the similarities go right down to the deficiencies by foot, although a more natural action, so hopefully can clean that up with some time.

I'm going to put her in the "could be anything" category. Clearly an athlete! And has at least played some school footy.

Summary so far: OUT Mithen, Pick 10, Pick 28, Pick 46 Watt (retired) Madigan (delisted) Hill (delisted inj. rep.) A.Mackin (remains inactive - possibly indefinitely?) IN Pick 3 O'Hehir Pick 21 Mahony Pick 63 Dethridge Hose (returns to active list) Assuming Beasley is also inactive, that leaves two spots, to possibly retain Denby Taylor and add one more.

Got to love a surprise!

All that time wasted wishing we were taller, when low to the ground is where it's at. The ball does often end up there... hopefully from the other team fumbling it, more than from us, of course.

Several draftees (mostly outside Vic) saying they picked up footy during Covid. Interesting.

SNAPSHOT: “A competitive onballer who thrives on the inside with a high running capacity and elite defensive pressure, while being able to go forward and impact the scoreboard.” Has played in the VFLW for the Pies.

Welcome to Molly! Zippy Fish is a name for the ages, but it's pretty great to have such an old-school-made-new-again name like Molly running around. Loved her words in her post-draft interview, to the effect of, "anyone can be a leader no matter their age". Reading further, she's been playing in the WAFLW for two seasons already, so even though the quality of that competition is perhaps not great (my speculation only), she has been playing against older players for a while already.

Agree O'Hehir looks to be that type we lack, and that all the best contenders have: tall, explosive, good kick, aerially sound. Fish could add some real pace and athleticism to our midfield (also needed), but I'm not sure we should be adding yet another player around the 160cm mark, especially a light one even more easily pushed off the footy? Yet clearly she's a talent... Types like Painter at 2 or Martin at 20 make sense to bolster our more contested mid depth. We're still one injury away from oblivion in that area. The other major gaps to fill at some point would be an intercept defender and perhaps a back-up ruck to take Watt's place?

Sarah Black's draft preview here: https://www.afl.com.au/aflw/news/1263082/sarah-blacks-draft-late-mail-who-will-your-club-pick Based on this: Pick 2: Fish or O'Hehir (outside chance Painter - comparison is Bri Davey) Pick 20: Linked to Grace Martin, a small utility (though after about 10, things seems variable so could be some surprises here)

So basically, if we take everyone at their word (though the Hawks haven't had much to say). Tayla wanted to stay. Hawks approached us, promised a high pick. The club were willing but only for a certain number. Cue much back and forth and attempts to do mega trades. These fall through. Hawks won't give what they implied they would. The club refuses to give Tayla up for a packet of chips a la Carlton. Tayla stays. The media put out click-baity headlines about why she wanted to go. Fin.

My understanding is that injury replacement players have a one-year contract and are pretty much automatically delisted once the injured player returns to the active list. Hose will presumably be good to go next season, so this follows. There is the opportunity to re-sign a replacement player if the list space allows. If Harris had gone, I reckon it may have been different. We're right to laud Grace's qualities to improve her chances elsewhere and remain on good terms in case we need to call her up again. I'm biased, but our statements in these instances, regardless of the player, are often more personalised and genuine-sounding than the rote stuff some other clubs put out.

If I'm calculating correctly, assuming we retain all the remaining listed players from this season (not factoring a potential Paxy retirement), that's 27. Add back in A.Mackin and Hose from the inactive list and remove their replacements, D.Taylor and Hill, back to 27. Beasley presumably goes to the inactive list as 1 year post ACL will be mid-September. 26. So 4 list spots, including 1 injury replacement. Potentially we sign D.Taylor back on.

Never in doubt! We were right to stick to our guns. There was no point giving her away cheaply. All said and done, she's still #1 all-time for total contested marks and marks i50 in the league. That's not something to under-value in competition where contested marking is still developing. Onwards and upwards! Some quotes from list manager Todd Patterson here: https://www.afl.com.au/aflw/news/1263248/tayla-harris-to-stay-at-melbourne-demons-after-shift-in-hawthorn-hawks-negotiations "We worked tirelessly to try to improve our list and assist other clubs' outcomes during this Trade Period. It's unfortunate that things have transpired so publicly, but we sit really comfortably with how we have operated over the last week and a half," Patterson said. "I think the best of Tayla Harris is still to come," Patterson said. "She's one of the most resilient people that I've met and I know that if anybody can come through this and be their best, it's Tayla. I have absolute certainty that, with the quality of people we have, no one is better placed to support her in that."

At this point, if she goes, it must be an untenable situation. Hopefully not the case. I just dredged up the trade we brought her in with, as a curiosity, and because I want to call it a win even if she goes haha. Part of a five-team, seven-player mega trade that boiled down to: MELBOURNE In – Olivia Purcell (Geelong), Tayla Harris (Carlton), picks 44 (Carlton) -> Tahlia Gillard, and 49 (Adelaide) -> Alison Brown Out – Chantel Emonson (Geelong), picks 15 (Geelong), 32 (Carlton), 42 (GWS) and 47 (Adelaide)

Now things get really interesting!