deelusions from afar

IMO - His highlights remind me more of Tom Lynch than Jeremy Cameron - doesn't seem to have the aerobic capacity or cleanness below his knees that you see with Cameron.

We wanted 2 picks inside 10 - doesn't mean we thought we would get it! That was just our starting position. If we get a top 10 pick (this year) and freo's first next year, then there's a chance that will be top 10 in that draft. From what I've heard, there is no way they would trade Treacy - he's a developing player in the area of the ground that is their greatest weakness.

I don't think they have cooled - they just know that he wants to come to them and we would rather get something than nothing. It's a different situation but not unlike what we're doing to Collingwood re Grundy - holding out 27 is unders but it may end up happening as they need to move on.

Are you saying Jacko for all of that?? I assume this is a joke. Melb In > 13, 25, F1st (Freo), F2nd (North), F3rd (North) and Treacy Freo In > Jackson There's no way Freo would do that. I know the pick values can be misleading but that equates to Pick 1, Pick 8 and Treacy (when they have as many young key forward options as we do)

I hate the Cats with a passion. If we lose Jacko and get pick 18 (and a future whatever) while they upgrade to pick 2 (essentially because they can pay Bowes salary) I will spew 🤮

Yeah I think it's likely we will trade our future first from next year to snare a best 22 player or to combine with Jackson comp to get as high up the draft as we can. As Lamb said - we are in "win now" mode. Future draft picks are irrelevant regardless of the quality of next year's draft.

Yeah I guess I was more pointing out that if as an experienced senior player he is averaging the least minutes in the team it shows the coaching staff have essentially stamped his papers as a fringe / depth player. A player in Harmes' position (like Sparrow, Bedford and Chandler when they've played) would have to do something pretty exceptional to get coaches votes as their role is mostly about keeping the pressure up to allow our stars to thrive. But you could argue the others are younger players that the coaches would expect to give more game time as their experience grows. Ultimately you can't have too many players filling positions they're not designed for eg midfielders playing on flanks and wings. As much as I love Harmes, if him leaving allows a specialist half forward / wingman to take his spot, then overall the team would be better off. The fact that we were playing Spargo and Harmes on a wing at times this year shows we really need another specialist in that role. But as you say it all looks to be moot as he is staying.

As nice as the high picks are... it seems like the players we'd most likely want (Sheezel, Cadman) would be gone by 5/7. Who would we be getting with these players. If Tarryn Thomas wants out, could it be used to snag him?

I agree with most of this. But one thing that often gets forgotten is the time on ground. This year Harmes is averaging 79min per match (less than 3 quarters of the match). For comparison Sparrow (82), Jordon (92), Viney (96), ANB (96), Brayshaw (100), Oliver (104), Trac (106) and Langdon (120). If we could go back and check I suspect his minutes in 2018 and 2019 would have been much higher. In terms of Centre bounce attendance percentage he averaged 16% for the year behind Oliver (86%), Viney (75%), Trac (75%), Dunstan (57%), Sparrow (32%) and was equal with Brayshaw. But this is potentially misleading as from rounds 15-18 he averaged around 45% but after that Brayshaw replaced him and he barely got back in there from round 19 onwards. As you say he's down the pecking order in terms of our preferred centre bounce players. Eg when Viney was out, they brought in Dunstan rather than giving Harmes a bigger role. He was tried at half back a few years back but doesn't have the skills / decision making to pull it off. He can kick a goal better than most mids and is a good contested mark for his size - but in our team it means he's forced to play the role of HFF with occasional wing and midfield rotation which is clearly not what he's most suited to. I love Harmes as a person (from the little I know) and as a player - but someone with his ability would be playing more than 80mins game time in most other teams - so don't blame him at all for testing the waters at essendon (but equally happy for him to stay).

Surely Logue is not worth pick 8. Will Freo have anything left? I don't think Cadman will be there at 3 - would need pick 1 or 2

Tim Lamb didn't seem like he would be happy with pick 43. I reckon it will involve a pick swap

I'm not a huge Lever fan (when compared with many of our other players) but he seems to be a critical player not just in a structural / role sense - but providing leadership in the dying moments when it's needed most. Think of his kick to max at the end of Rd23 last year or his kick into the centre at the end of the carlton match this year. I'm hoping that injuries did hamper him this year and that he will be back to last year's form next year.

Interesting that Tim Lamb referred to us being in "Win Now" mode (or something similar). That's obviously no surprise but I wonder how much it effects our trading / drafting strategy. Obviously Grundy very much fits that but if we are after a top 10 pick then who realistically will be ready to go next year? Would they pick based on who is going to be the best player or who is going to fit our needs best in the next 3-5 years (but might not have the ceiling of others that could take longer).

Those highlights aren't flattering for Tsatas - it's almost like the person that put it together are trying to reduce his value. Doesn't seem to match what other people's views of him are.

I reckon still a good chance North or GWS go Cadman - both with new coaches - this is when you can afford to take a big man that will eventually become a focal point. Wardlaw was meant to be rated almost as highly as Ashcroft but keeps pinging hamstrings. So comes down to how much a club believes they can manage the injury. Potentially a Chris Judd type scenario. Surely Essendon will take Sheezel if he's still there (I think he'll go in the first 4)

Unlucky for Yze. I reckon once they push Sheedy out they will be a far more united club and the AFL will do everything they can to get them competitive again. It's good business if the big clubs are in the finals - if Essendon gets it right then the "big 4" Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond will be a good chance of making finals next year. The commission will be rubbing their hands together as will the broadcasters! I also think Scott will work for them - he had an ageing list at the Roos and didn't have the facilities or high draft picks that the bombers will have. 2 Preliminary finals wasn't a bad effort for what he had IMO.

Hmmm...From memory we have an extra third and fourth from last year. We seem to be open to some of our less critical players to be shopped around (Hunt, Tomlinson, Bedford) who will net us late second rounders at best. It's reportedly a weak draft (particularly after the first 30) where we are unlikely to use many selections. So what are we going to do with all our selections above 30?

To be fair i think he's saying that if he tries to mark every kick to him and kicks 2 goals a game but otherwise the defenders either outmark him or are able to clear the ball away, then that's less valuable than kicking less goals if it leads to 3+ goals from the crumbs he creates. Having said that, I don't think this has worked overly well - partly because once the ball does hit the ground, Brown is a liability.

That's assuming the points system is an accurate way of measuring the value of draft picks. Only those that know the draft talent well enough could say for sure. But if (hypothetically) West Coast traded pick 2 for picks 13 and 14 this year, most people would think they are nuts. When we did the Salem / Tyson deal we effectively turned pick 3 into two top 10 picks as tyson was previously top 5. That was a tough enough sell to supporters. If you're wanting a key forward then it sounds like there's one standout and then it's a lottery.

Don't know why North have to give up their second from next year in that deal. Pick 1 for Logue, 13 and a future first is fairer IMO. Though given they only have one high pick they can use, I think they would most likely want two early picks in this years draft rather than next year - unless next years draft really is that much better than this years'.

You might be right CS. Wouldn't be terrible for us given next years draft is "reportedly" stronger than this years and as others have noted, there's good reason to think Freo will slip a bit next year. If that does play out (we get pick 7) it will be interesting if we try to move further up the order - if we do it will suggest we have our eye on someone at the pointy end.

Don't disagree... though it does say it's only focusing on 2021. Not 2022.

I suspect Hunt was told in his exit interview that it is likely Bowey and others will go past him next year

Same as our gamestyle - go conservative and give nothing away so it can't come back to bit you on the rebound.

Given a number of trades involves North / Brisbane and its unclear if their coaches will remain the trade situation will be interesting. Eg Does Logue still want to go to North? Would people want us to package up what we get to try and get higher up the order (Pick 1 is tradeable) or more just go scatter gun approach with 2 first round picks?