deelusions from afar

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?

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?