deelusions from afar

Agree @adonski and @MrFreeze - BBB arguably should be first picked of the forwards - given his extra height, reliability for set shots and experience. My main concern is how we use the spare ruckman. If Gawn (and to a lesser extent Grundy) spend time forward, then I think BBB becomes a liability once the ball hits the ground. We got burnt a lot in the second half of last year with Gawn and BBB in the same forward-line (admittedly both were prob not 100%) and the opposition running the ball out with ease. I wouldn't say Tmac is necessarily suited to this situation either. Fortunately this seems to be an area strength in JVR's game but he is a kid. I felt like BBB was also asked to play a type of role that he isn't suited to (one out and force a contest rather than on the lead) - will his role have changed for 2023? There is definitely room for BBB in my book - but only with the right mix.

Thank you so much to the track watches that have given us great insight into how we are tracking in the preseason (training the house down!) Found it interesting to hear TMac spent much of the match sim in defence. Is he likely to be a permanent fixture there? Will he be the swingman? Could he play in the same backline as Petty, Lever, May (replacing someone like Hibberd if the injuries do catch up with him)? At the end of last year I thought they needed to go with TMac / Turner back and shift Petty forward as he has the style of play and body to play the big crash power forward role in a way that all our other options can't. JVR is showing great signs but he is yet to play a senior game! I know Goody loved having TMac in the team early in 2022 as he was able to be shifted to defence if anyone went down. It meant that if someone like Chandler was the sub, it didn't hurt us if a key defender went down as we could play a smaller forwardline. Obviously having Grundy in the side (and how they use him and Max) may further influence how this works. If I were picking the side I would think it would work something like: Key defenders: May, Lever, Petty** (with Turner, Smith as backup) Key Forwards: TMac**, JVR, Fritsch, ruckman* (with BBB and Schache as backup) * I hope the resting ruckman actually plays in the ruck and the ruckman plays loose across half back. I just can't see us looking dangerous with Grundy / Gawn resting forward unless the ball movement is improved x1000 from last year. ** I would like to see Petty and TMac swap positions from time to time. I think the best teams and best coaches have flexibility built into the lineup so that opposition weaknesses can be exploited and you can have plan B scenarios without throwing out the game plan.

But realistically, who is going to give up a first for next year?

Disagree guys. Neitz was an AA key back as well - should we have left him there his whole career? Petty's talents are wasted in defence - particularly when May is in the team already. We have plenty of backup for his role - Tomlinson, Smith, Schache, McDonald, Turner etc. None of them are as good as him but all at their best (eg pre-injury Tomlinson, McDonald) are capable of playing that role effectively which frees up Petty to play the role we need. I think Turner is the one to fill his spot in defence - at the rate of his development, he should be in the team. We now have a number of tall forward options but if people think JVR can come in at 19/20 and hold the forwardline together then they're delusional. He's just a kid. Having Petty forward (or at least used frequently as a swing man) is needed in 2022. Would much rather that than have all my eggs in the Gawn/TMac/Brown basket.

I remember when our last NGA player Bedford first came on the scene a lot of people questioned whether he'd make it - and it took him 4 years to get (semi) regular games at senior level and make an impact. It feels like AMW has shown a bit more in his first season and probably has what I think is Bedford's greatest weakness - good foot skills. Hopefully with greater fitness base he will be able to be more consistent in games

I don't mind the strategy but if everyone rates next year's draft higher than this year then why would they give up their first for next year if they only slide slightly forward? Having said that our team seem to be able to work their magic with pick swapping so you might be on to something.

But doesn't it work the other way - ie if Lions (for example) use picks before 37 to match bids then our pick slides forward?

The best footballers are generally midfielders or special key forwards. This is true in terms of ranking / voting at AFL level but also true in terms of the prospective U18 stars. It makes sense because you want your best players involved as often as possible. But as far as our team goes, we have plenty of talent in the midfield. Some more pace and polish wouldn't go astray but we are largely the envy of the comp with the talent we have there. So if we are not drafting tall (which we still might), to get the greatest level of improvement, it is going to come from players that play on flanks, pockets and maybe the wing (if Hunter, Howes etc are not the answer). My query is: Are the best flankers / pockets at AFL level midfielders at U18 level, or do they generally play those positions at junior level? It's pretty rare that a pocket / flanker would be considered a top 10 pick. Given we have pick 13, if we are not going for a key forward, maybe we're likely to find a decent player that fills a need in any case? Obviously Daicos has been special this year (but presume he was a midfielder in juniors), Young (Freo) was a half back highly rated and Nick Vlaustin are others that comes to mind... but can't think of too many high picks that play exclusively on a flank or pocket (i.e. obviously the good ones that play HFF / mid are often highly rated).

Has Hunter spoken to the media at all (before or after the trade)? Or have we only heard from his manager? Haven't heard if he was keen to leave, or was essentially given an ultimatum.

Don't think this is where it came from ... but at a grandfinal breakfast function I went to, Damian Hardwick was asked a question about what he thinks of the rule changes over the last few years (given some people think they were designed to stop Richmond's dominance) and whether he thinks there will be any more changes. He said (paraphrasing): - doesn't think the rules have impacted Richmond specifically - they have been effective at achieving what they were designed to do. Arguably the game is as good to watch from a supporter point of view than its ever been. - doesn't think there'll be any more changes for a while. and then he said 'actually, I think there will be a rule change for next year and that is increasing the number of interchange players by one and doing away with the sub. Clubs have been consulted about this for some time. He thinks it will effectively mean that most clubs will play two ruckman'

You got it! It's interesting to note how much everyone was salivating over him prior to the draft. Not unlike Cadman now. Not saying that Cadman won't be a good player... but it is interesting that North were willing to give up the chance to take him. Are they idiots (almost definitely) or do they know the draft next year has better key forward options.

Can anyone guess who this player is - I've include profiles on the same player by two different people (hint: it’s not Cadman) Profile 1: X is the best key position forward in the draft. X has clean hands and marks the ball well overhead, due to his strong ball reading ability. After winning the (name) Medal, for the best player at the national championships, X’s name was put into contention for the number one pick. He is a perfect fit for the (club), a side screaming out for a key position forward. X has a clean set shot technique and had the most shots on goal this year, compared with any other draft prospect. At 199 centimetres, X moves well – running a beep test of 14.1 at the national combine indicating his strong endurance. He also has the ability to play in the ruck and will develop into a forward that has the capability to play as a back up ruckman if needed. Profile 2: X put his scores on the board early, and just kept kicking goals throughout this year to cement himself near the top of the draft order. The key forward is an excellent shot for goal, has a great engine plus the height to outmark most of the defenders he's matched up against. He kicked a record haul of 24 goals at the under-18 championships and is not a forward who needs heaps of touches to make a scoreboard impact.

Maybe but I think we're targeting someone other than Cadman and I reckon we will use a first from next year with another pick to move into the top 10

Would love to see us take a punt on an exciting player like Munkara. Especially with Jackson leaving who definitely has X factor. Would think it would be unlikely. I head Dimma Hardwick talk at a function recently and he mentioned teams are built up of structure and unstructured players. At the tigers they have Martin and Bolton as their unstructured players. They've tried to play Sydney Stack in the same team but it's too many unstructured players. I reckon that's part of the reason players with this X factor aren't always drafted in. It's easier for coaches to structure their game plan around players the are boring and predictable.

I thought they poured cold water on this last week. Have there been further reports this is still alive?

I'm pretty sure we will use our first round pick from next year (or a future first from Freo or both) to get another high pick. Regardless of the quality of the draft I think we back our system to find the best players and then get a year of development into them.

But this is propaganda. It's selectively edited. Do you think the club would put out a video that shows us not getting who we really wanted? It would be awkward for the recruiters and awkward for the players we ultimately take. I think the fact that Geelong trade up just before us indicates they thought we or the next club/s were going to select Holmes. It's still great / interesting content for fans - but just because they say we wanted the two best kicks in the draft, doesn't mean it was our first plan. I think we know (early days I know) that we would definitely choose Holmes over Laurie right now. Haven't given up on Laurie but Holmes is a beauty!

I like your thinking but it's essentially 2 separate trades: us with Freo then us with Geelong. But I don't think Freo are currently will to give up P13, F1 and F2 (freo not north)?

If the Dunkley deal doesn't get done, does he go into the PSD as well? And if so would North pick him ahead of LJ? I think they would if they thought he was more chance of staying after one year. That would bring WCE into the picture.

Fair enough... But how did the Lachie Weller trade go ahead then? Surely they can say there were no guarantees (North could pick him) and the player they got from Freo fits an important need. There's enough ways they could deny any tampering (although equally it could blow up in their face)

Given WA is a two team town, what's to stop Freo and WCE doing a deal which seems lopsided but with a player. Not unlike Freo trading Lachie Weller to the Suns and receiving pick 2 a few years back. eg WCE trade pick 2 to Freo and in return Freo trade 13 and Player X (an average player). WCE and Freo "try" to do a deal with Melbourne but can't come to an arrangement by the end of the trade period. LJ says to Melbourne he's really sorry but he is homesick - it's not his fault that a deal wasn't done. LJ goes into PSD and given he's already moved to WA, North don't pick him. So WCE get him for merely a pick slide (or whatever the deal is) and Freo boost their draft hand. Everyone wins... except us. We would say they draft tampered but they say we just don't appreciate the value of Player X. Given the AFL turns a blind eye to teams that do dodgy things, they would probably waive it through. Could that happen?

I love the idea of getting Cadman but it's high risk as we have to give up a lot and there's a good chance (like many key forwards) he will be a bust. Impossible to judge, but if the talent pool of this draft is shallow, where would he be ranked in other drafts? He will also likely need a few years before he makes an impact at AFL level. I think if JVR is ready to play 15 games and Petty is tried forward (if Turner can play his role in defence) this will be enough. Gawn will likely play forward and TMac / BBB will come in only if their form demands it. Surely our needs would be better served by targeting someone who can play wing / half forward next year - would need to have 2 of the following 3 qualities to replace what we already have (excellent speed, excellent disposal skills, excellent endurance).

Maybe that's the advantage of our approach - the Stringer deal was years ago and it still taints them? I feel like in this case the dogs haven't done much wrong and the lions are over-reaching because they can.

But going by that analogy, we haven't accepted Freo's first offer so it's our fault if we get nothing for Jackson. For the lions to bring in Dunkley the dogs b&f winner, they should be taking a hit and not getting it all their own way. They have two father sons coming in and need points - but they can go into deficit next year as well. Surely it's fair enough for the dogs to stand their ground as we would expect the dees to with Freo. What am I missing?