Lucifers Hero

.

If that is the intended comparison to the Tigers, it is drawing a long bow, imv. I'm also optimistic. Its just that there is little to support that we can copy tigers, roos, crows or anyone else. tbh, at this stage I would settle for a sustained period of making and winning some finals.

I know that - he was one who turned us down.

Every chance that Sam Mitchell and Hodge can be added to that list in a few years. Awesome record. Re Roos thought processes. I've often wondered how we ended up with Goodwin who had minimal coaching experience. In fact just a few years at a dodgy club in turmoil. Goodwin was appointed about a year after Roos. I doubt Roos spent that year idly waiting for him to walk in the front door. There were occasional rumours of potential coaches but we will never know how many we approached who didn't make the grade or who knocked us back. So, was it a Bradbury appointment? I still think Goodwin can be a good coach. Was he the best around at the time? Maybe, just the best we could get. Just noticed another similar thread. @Demonland maybe this thread should be merged with

I love the optimism and hope that goes with comparisons to the Tigers. This is their recent track record: 6 of 7 years in the finals. 2016 was clearly an aberration. The % shows they have always been a high scoring and good defensive side (except 2016), even before they regularly made finals. They made some bold changes at end of 2016, not the least of which was bringing in Balme. The mentoring of Hardwick and the steadying hand he brought to the club shouldn't be underestimated. Other than re-vamping the assistant coaches I see little similarity with our recent past. Can we copy Tigers and go from the bottom of the ladder to premiers or regular PF/GF. Personally I doubt it. Ask again after we have made finals for 3/4 years. Sadly, there is just as much chance that we are a 'flash in the pan' team like Adelaide (GF 2017 after several years of finals), Freo (GF 2015 after several years of finals), Port (PF 2014). But I desperately hope we are not.

^^^ @Maccapost. Sydney, Hawks, Geelong and too a lesser extent Collingwood have been trading top picks for A grade talent for the last decade. Consistently in flag contention as a result. They occasionally take a dip to the bottom of the ladder, get their A+ players but bounce back up again. We on the other hand have been-in-love-with-the-draft for over a decade and only changed when Roos et al boldly split pick #2 which sadly didn't achieve the results we all hoped. Nonetheless, as you have shown it was the right strategy.

Agree, Hawks wouldn't give up #10 alone for Patton, but they may package it up with other picks/players with GWS so it would be available for our pick #2 split. Not so good for us if Hawks do their own pick split of #10 with another club to get Patton. What if Caldwell or Bonar don't want to leave? iirc Tyson was no where near our first choice to go with GWS pick #9 for our pick #2, a few years back. We took him because the players we wanted wouldn't leave or GWS wouldn't let them go. We need a better deal this time.

At the start of this thread GWS had picks 11 and 13. That is now #11 and #17-18 which will be #12 (or 13) and #18-20 after pp, GA comp picks and academy picks. The slide for us is huge and not only 'draft points'. The quality of player available at 18 to 20 is very different from one at 13. GWS will have to throw in something big to make a deal happen. If as mooted Patton goes to Hawks for a 1st round pick (Hawks currently have #10) I would be looking for at least that. Or GWS need to find some significant picks and A grade players. Gws don't voluntarily let go their A graders unless the player demands a trade to a club of his choice. Interesting times. I just hope we don't blink.

Our recruiters must have left skill and talent offer the Demon's job descriptions for a lot of our players... Lack of skill has been the biggest criticism of our team in recent times, 2018 achievements not withstanding.

Fair comment given that Hawkins was also, rightly or wrongly, ousted by the Tribunal, increasing the probability of Richmond making it to the GF, especially with the extra week rest.

Giants saying the whole match review/tribunal system is favouring Coll. Greene suspension The MRO was Michael Christianson, a Collingwood premiership player and Shane Wakelin, Collingwood player on Tuesday night's Tribunal. If it was a Melbourne player I would be also be arguing the system is rigged. The AFL should never have allowed that much potential bias in favour of Coll, GWS opps in the Prelim. Poor 'optics' to say the least. And, fails 'the pub test'!

Carlton already have 3 potentially excellent tall forwards: Curnow, McKay and McGovern so why would they go for another who is injury prone... ...they are more likely to use their chips for the small forward Papley and speedy Martin who they need much more than Patton. Interesting that so many good players are being linked to Carlton: Coniglio (before signing with GWS), Papley, Martin, Isaac Smith, Patton. It is looking very much like an up and coming 'destination club'. If Patton is really on the market, surely we could include him in any pick # split, we could sure do with a tall forward. Or is he another that has said he doesn't want to come to the demons?

So who should GCS play in Darwin that doesn't overly disadvantage them? Any of the SA or WA teams gives them the 'Home Crowd' advantage. Hard to see it being one of the big Melbourne Clubs. Saints play in China. That leaves Demons, Bulldogs, North (unlikely as they play in Tassie) and ...maybe GWS. tbh, I don't really care who they play as long as it isn't us.

PJ was keen to get out of the Darwin game some time ago but was stuck with it. And Essendon tried to get in on it when there were signs we didn't want Darwin. PJ stayed in after pressure from the AFL and we couldn't afford to forfeit their sponsorhip. PJ was very happy to keep Alice as it is the zone for our NGA. He was able to negotiate the Darwin game to be before a bye as a compromise. I think PJ addressed the Darwin game in a podcast or interview but I can't find it. This article darwin-game is the latest I could find. His positon can be discerned from this: "However Jackson was keen to point out that the cessation of games in Darwin would not necessarily mean Melbourne would play more at the MCG, where the Demons are only contractually obliged to play nine home games a season. He said games moved from the NT could become home games at the newly renamed Marvel Stadium. I doubt anyone at the club is unhappy about losing Darwin. But it will be interesting to see what $ adjustments the AFL make for our loss of revenue from NT. I would think the Darwin game needs to be GCS vs Lions (both with home games the following week) so as not to disadvantage other clubs from the travel and fatigue.

I'm not sensitive to criticisms of Roos at all but I will call out posts that present opinion as fact as the basis for criticism ie " But the real mistake in that trade was getting Tyson. Not so much in terms of his ability... more in the type of player is he is - is - a contested, inside player with average foot skills. A type we have a surfeit of. We needed silk and we got whatever the opposite is". My post described why that comment is and was not correct, based not on hindsight but on the facts at the time the decisions were made and that the criticism of Roos based on that comment are unfounded. Anyway, I'm out on this.

You could be right, but he has only played a handful of games there so not much opportunity to show what he can do. iirc his only midfield stint was early 2018 and was moved to defence when Brayshaw came back into the team. For mine he could be the Sam Michell type of midfielder: tough as, not fast but smart enough to find space and time to hit up a target or put the ball to advantage of team mate.

The full trade was: Out: pick 2 (Kelly), 20 (Gardiner - Lions), 72 (GWS passed) In: Tyson/Preuss, pick 9 (Salem), pick 53 (Hunt). At the time we took Tyson we did not have "a surfeit of contested, inside player with average foot skills" as you claim. Our midfield was held together by Jones, Vince and a very young Viney. Sure Jones/Viney can't kick either but we compounded the problem by not using Salem in the middle as he was needed as an attacking defender. Tyson was top 5 in our BnF and played in the 2019 Prelim. He was good for us for 5 years in the role he was recruited for. He couldn't adapt to an outside role but that does not make it a poor decision to recruit him 5 years earlier. And now we have Preuss giving us a much more balanced team. Salem is about to reach his peak and Hunt has been more than serviceable. Sure, Kelly is a gun but where would we be if we had taken him at 2? Probably won more games than we did in 2014/2015 and not have the top picks to get all of Petracca, Brayshaw, Oliver. The silk (footy IQ and field kicking) we had with Roos has been traded out by Goodwin (and not replaced): Watts, Hogan. Just for the record, in terms of pace Roos recruited Hunt and Garlett. imv he left us a list which had much greater talent, skill, speed and balance than the one we have today. And if anyone wants to criticise the trade the pick of the bunch was The Bont so people should stop fixating on Kelly. Its just so easy to cherry pick the parts of the story that suit your narrative: recruiting by Roos was poor and left us without the 'silk'!

With the possibility of Hawthorn getting picks for traded out players, GWS return picks (for say pick 10) and future pick exchange (GWS and Hawks) it is really hard to foresee what might happen, especially after the first round. Even harder to consider how their trades with other clubs might pan out. So, I won't hazard a guess. Just saying that posters may have misjudged GWS' bargaining position when it comes to splitting pick #2. They could easily have 3 mid first round picks to play with and multiple clubs to deal with.

Maybe the media pundits are wrong. But, looking at it logically: GWS can't afford to keep Patton with his big 2020 salary from a back-ended contract. Patton has already earnt millions. At the Hawks he knows he will get great medical treatment (ala Burgoyne, O'Meara, Scully). I'm guessing those factors and the best chance to rebuild his career mean a lot more than $$ right now. if he proves he can play 20-24 games a year the $$ will come back. A healthy Patton is worth more than a first round pick. But like Scully, if they can offload Patton's salary they will discount the trade value Hawks have pick 10 - will that be part of the deal? The significance for this thread is that GWS may have a lot more to play with (ie 3 mid first round picks) and many more options in negotiating a pick 2 split.

Patton is contracted so comp picks don't come into play. Hawks need to trade for him.

My guess it will be at least 10 players out. Add Guy Walker to the 3 names I just posted. And Frost is rumoured to be traded. That is 10 outs. And I wouldn't be surprised if another contracted player isn't traded.

Not sure why 8 is a magic number but if you want 3 more names: Stretch, Kennedy Harris, J Wagner still un-contracted and like other OOC players no rumours that they have re-sgined (and announcements yet to be made).

GWS are looking for a mid 1st round pick for Patton jonathan-patton-set-to-join-hawthorn apparently on about $360K. As an aside, Patton is reported to have been fit to play since July but chose not to, to avoid injury and derail the trade. patton-places-career-on-hold-amid-near-certain-hawks-move It reports he has a lucrative back-ended deal so it will be a lot of money off GWS's books. If Patton goes for a big paycut to around $360 (AFL average) it makes me think fans greatly overestimate what some players will play for and that not all trades involve big $$.

He has been very open about his personal issues: allen-christensen-reveals-gambling-problem-at-geelong Credits Neil Balme for a heart to heart and turning him around: “Balme said, we obviously need to help you...I’m forever grateful for that because that was a light bulb moment for me.” According to the article (March 2019) he hadn't placed a bet since 2014. So seems low risk. But played only 13 games for the Lions this year so not a regular 22. imv he is a poor man's Jamie Elliot. Prefer the latter. As an aside, Lions are getting Ah Chee from the Suns so it forces Christensen out. lions-offer-longterm-deal-to-wantaway-suns-highflyer Ah Chee is just 21 and has "...officially requested a move up the highway last week to fulfill Chris Fagan's plan to add more pace at the Gabba next season". With Ah Chee, Brisbane are adding the finishing touches to an already very, very good list. They will have a harder draw next year but don't see them going too far backwards.

UPDATE. UPDATE. UPDATE. Did a bit more checking on Maynard. It turns out my data was correct - he was promoted to the senior list but club website incorrectly shows him as a Rookie maynard-elevated-to-senior-list So we did have 39 Primary Listed Players for 2019. We had 6 'A' Rookies and 2 'B' Rookies This is the updated table showing the List and announced ins/outs so far Note: Corey Wagner was re-contracted as a Rookie. Many thanks @xman97for list rules. Very helpful and have incorporated them into the table.