Lucifers Hero

A lot worse than 50 when factoring in about 15-20 1st and 2nd round Father/son Academy picks next year. That is why it looks to me we have given him away.

Points aside are we actually getting anything? 50 is a small upgrade on 61 Don't put much practical value on our future 4th Hawks future 2nd (35-45 range after next years F/S amd academy players) roughly equal to/small upgrade/downgrade on our current 42. Not unhappy with the trade but can't help but feel we gave him away.

Please merge with Brad Hill thread...

According to Fox the the mooted deal between GWS and Adelaide: GWS send Pick 12, 18 and their future first-round pick (2020) to the Crows in exchange for Pick 4. ie 3 first round picks. That will set a guide for the 'splitting' value of pick 3. Geelong atm, hold a similar hand but not as good as Adelaide's offer: Picks 14, 17, 24 this year. And two 2020 first round picks, their own and WCE. One would think Kelly makes WCE stronger and Geelong weaker so Geelong may have a better 2020 first round pick. If Geelong trade a few of their mid picks up the order they will hold a strong hand for pick 3. A word about 2020 picks: there appear to be a lot of F/S and Academy picks that are touted as first round picks so any later first round pick not in the top 10-12 could easily go out to 23 to 25 or worse. So doubt the real value of WCE, GWS, Geelong 2020 first round picks. Other teams are candidates for pick 3 split: Freo and even GCS who will have a swag of top 10 picks next year. At least their own natural pick, the mid first round pp and any they get for possible trades of King and Lukoscius. The risk of the Adelaide deal for GWS is that whoever we split pick 3 with might take Green who has been likened to Bontempelli and Cripps.

Couldn't bear the smug so and so prancing around in our red and blue.

Geelong are looking to trade up the order. Wells: “There’s some players we would certainly be interested in trading up if we could be sure of picking them and I guess the best way to get that is to have pick three.” cats-consider-options-with-newly-acquired-draft-picks/

That would be quite a coup as Bruce has committed to 4 years at the Bulldogs. But Saints are playing hard ball saying the Bulldogs pick #32 won't get the deal done. saints won't let Bruce go cheaply Bob Murphy would have some close contacts at the Bulldogs so it might be good intel.

All very quiet. Can't find where Frosty has asked for a trade or nominated a club or have I missed the announcements. Anyone have an update?

If it was something went very wrong last off-season and pre-season. I recall May saying he didn't know what the club expected fitness wise until he showed up for the pre-season which I think was in November. I read this as a fresh approach, especially the running that matches the demands of his role and focusing on core: “My running is a lot different – very role specific running,” May said. “A lot of repeat efforts, like two or three quick efforts then you walk for a bit rather than just running 1km – that’s just not what we do in a game. “There’s still an aspect of that certain base line endurance that you need to play the game, but I think to be the best defender, being able to maximise those high intensity efforts will allow me to stop a forward getting the ball.” “It’s more my core, my hammys and glutes.." Read more about May's approach here: mays-plan-to-attack-the-preseason

He has a very tailored program - suspect Burgess' hand at work. Hope they can make it 23-26 games instead of 22!

Peter Wright Contract Renewal

I read the 'it’s what it’s going to get done for' as related to Langdon. Morris is at the shallow end of the media pool. The last sentence has so many qualifiers it is so not credible. It seems he is padding out his story.

I do! Not so long ago a team structure was based around 10-12 'on-ballers'. The 'on-ballers' rotate midfield/forward/back during a game. Vince, Harmes, Brayshaw, Petracca, Salem, Oliver, AvB, Stretch, ANB were recruited on that basis. We also had Viney and Jones as 'on-ballers'. Clearly our game plan has changed from when Roos' recruited them altho I don't think the logic of 10-12 'on-ballers' should be jettisoned. Our mix of 'on-ballers' is not right. We are rectifying up/down the wing pace issue with Langdon and to some extent Tomlinson. There is still the issue of spread from the stoppages and that is more to do with set ups and positioning than pace. Brayshaw is one of our smartest midfield/onball players. I would say he has more footy smarts than all those named above except Oliver and Salem. And Brayshaw is one of our best. I think the conversation needs to be around 'on-ballers' not 'midfielders'. imv Petracca, Viney, Oliver, Harmes and Brayshaw can play 'on-ball'. They typically play about 80% game time so that at any given time one is on the bench. Another can play forward or back during their 80% on the ground. That also helps keep them fresh to run out quarters and the game which is important with our ballistic, play on at all costs game. tbh, I think our weak link is Viney's lack of flexibility. He has only one position which reduces Goodwin's tactics. He is our captain and toughest so isn't going anywhere. imv the issue isn't which of the 'midfielders' is 'surplus' I think the coaching challenge is to work out how to use our best talent now and in the future.

Thanks. So they are. My research is slipping!

The article was written a few weeks ago. Is North's offer still on the table? They need a bit of coin to pay Keath and Bruce that they have effectively committed to. They even made Keath cancel his overseas holiday and into surgery. There are no highly paid Roos leaving so can't see them getting Papley. Edit: See Drysdale Demon post below. I have the wrong club. Keath and Bruce are on their way to the Dogs.

Tomlinson: "Steve May's got a ripping left foot out of the backline, I won't mind getting hit on the wing with that, it's pretty good". Tomlinson Trade Reckon he also won't mind getting a few from Salem.

Apologies, misinterpretation on my part. Still feel Goodwin needs more and better experience than less. But as you say, who knows. All will be revealed soon, I hope.

Haven't noticed any reports.

If Jennings overstepped his remit that is an issue with Jennings not the reason to cease the role. Many clubs have a strategy coach, including Clarkson. Interestingly when Geelong (Bomber), Richmond (Hardwick) and Collingwood (Buckley) did their big reviews they took tasks off the senior coach and/or taught them to delegate and it did wonders delivering premierships and GF appearances. I would be concerned if we were doing the opposite and putting more work on Goodwin. He has more than enough to worry about without doing all the strategy work.

That would concern me. Goodwin, Plapp and Chaplin inexperienced and we don't have a forward coach. They didn't do well when we hit rough water. Jennings' role was 'strategy', effectively our 'brains trust'. He served us very well for until this year. But so many things went wrong this year it can't be put down to his strategy work. Goodwin needs more and better help than he had last year not less. Extra unnecessary burden on him if Jennings is not replaced.

@Mach5 has also indicated we have filled the vacant positions which I've interpreted as 3 vacancies will have 3 replacement. Hopefully it isn't a case of the club thinking someone is over the line and then found to not be joining us. What we know: Richardson for McCartney, the line coach (hopefully for forward ) referred to in the article for Rawlings. That leaves the Jennings strategy role. Hopefully, we will still replace him. Maybe M5 can shed light on this.

Richmond have 9.

Garbo's post below clarifies the difference between Rich and GWS second rd pick vs end of second rnd pick Thanks Garbo. Just to clarify the criteria. The AFL essentially look at Age and Contract $. They don't look at contract length. The bands are: 1st round (after natural pick) End of first round 2nd round (after natural pick) End of second round. We don't know where in the End of 2nd Round (Band 4) Tomlinson came in at. He could be on the edge of a 2nd Round pick (Band 3). So we can't say that we overpaid, underpaid or that Tomlinson is on $xxx. fwiw this article says his contract is $500 pa Tomlinson Trade I don't really care tbh. I was simply trying to answer SWYL's question but didn't get it quite right. Tricked by #39 and #40 looking the same for the two grand finalists.

Richmond got end of 2nd comp pick (#39) for Ellis and he is reportedly on $600k pa for 5 years. So Tomlinson would have to be in the same range to get the same comp pick #40

What do folks make of this: Mahoney: “Angus is contracted to us and he is not going anywhere. Fremantle made it very clear there were some reports he was in Perth, but it was nothing to do with the Fremantle Football Club.” Fremantle’s Peter Bell was equally as bemused, declaring he wasn’t keen to speculate on potential players the club could sign. “Well he’s a contracted player for Melbourne. A very good player,” Bell said...“I’d prefer not to comment on other players that we are or aren’t interested in. I’m not going to speculate on Angus, he’s a contracted player.” Brayshaw Rumours Bell being didn't shut the conversation down. Very coy.