Lucifers Hero

Kozzie is a Noongar man as is Harley Bennell. There have been and are many AFL players are Noongar men. A few notables: Polly Farmer, Buddy, Barry Cable, Nicky Winmar, Garlett, Matera, Bennell, Jetta, Pickett, Krakouer, Burgoyne, Ryder and the list goes on. Lots of people for young Kozzy to draw inspiration from.

Shorter breaks will be a real disadvantage to young teams, especially in finals. Expect a lot of 4th quarter fade outs.

Given that we passed the next likely was Sydney at #5 but was taken at #10. Draft Points: Pick 5: 1,878 Pick 10: 1,395 Diff (max deficit): 483 pts = pick 37. Other clubs with an early bid (Crows/Freo) had their own agendas. Had they bid on Green the Diff/max deficit would be smaller than above (and the value pick equivalent could be pick #67). There was no real 'hurt' factor to GWS. No real incentive for other clubs to bid.

Any idea how Carlton got live pick 20? Pick 22 was the pick in the swap being GCS's end of first round pp pick from the AFL? Was there another swap somewhere? A swap with Port at some stage, they haven't used what was pick 18 and now have pick 22?

AFL Twitter has come to life: Cal Twomey's intel suggests the Blues' bidding spree is an attempt to buy time as they look for a pick swap... foiled by GWS who matched the bid quickly and started the clock on the next trade \. Edit: Carlton swapped with GCS who now have pick 11 who selected Flanders. (Gold Coast receive picks No.11 and 62 from Carlton for picks No.17 and 22). Good deal for Carlton!

AFL website/twitter is useless. HS website showing Adelaide/Carlton discussing pick swap and GWS and Pies have done a pick swap. No details as can't get behind pay wall. AFL really needs to lift its game!

Dylan Stephens by Sydney a bit of a surprise. Really opens up picks 6 to 15! There was a pick swap there of later picks - anyone catch what/who it was?

A bit late given that all the pre-season fitness and conditioning programs were designed eons ago for a 20min break. The AFLPA and the AFL want to shorten games but this seems more a back door way of fatiguing players so that the last quarter opens up. Lots of other ways to shorten games: umpries bounce the ball rather than wait for ruckmen to nominate, speed up score review, not wait for broadcasters to run their ads after goals, change the 'time-on' rule etc etc.

I shall rephrase - first round ends when the holder of Richmond's first round pick drafts a player.

After the premiers, Richmond has had its first pick.

The assumption that GWS want Green so badly is the issue. According to some reports they don't and will let us keep him. If they do want him badly, GWS can swap pick 4 (after our bid) for another club's 2020 first round pick and a swag of later 2020 picks. Several clubs have 2 first round and multiple later round picks in 2020 which they could use to swap for #4 and stay within AFL rules eg Brisbane and maybe North). Or swap #4 for a club's 3rd/4th round picks this year and their 2020 first round pick. So GWS use rubbish picks this year, go into deficit and get the extra first round player next year. GWS may go into deficit but I read somewhere that swapped/traded in picks aren't used to make up a deficit; only natural picks. So GWS won't be using #4 on Green no matter what we do. The risk for us is we miss out on the player we really want. The only difference if we bid is that Ash (or whoever) stays in the pool. BTW, Sydney yesterday said they won't bid on Green at 5 and some phantom draft watchers see him sliding to our pick 10. I reckon most clubs have moved on from 'forcing' GWS to pay a 'fair' price because they have - GWS gave up 3 first round picks to get 4: 12 and 18 to saints for 6 then it and their 2020 first round pick to the Crows for 4. Other than who we take, where Green is called is one of the more interesting things in the draft.

I might just mention that Mahoney put up a number of charts that were not about 2019 injuries/surgeries. They were on Lessons Learnt, Actions for 2020, Programs etc. I complement the club for identifying many other problem areas and not just excuse the year as injury and surgery issues (which undoubtedly had a significant impact). Good questions, Dr G. On data analytics. Pert said as part of the review they engaged a consultant data analytics group (sorry, didn't get the name) that benchmarked us on a range of measures. Putting on my Management Consultant hat, they would have identified where we are falling behind and driven a number of initiatives and changes. I like that there was some 'science' behind the changes made and not just 'gut feel'. Without the science we could have ended up with 'knee jerk' reactions rather than a clear direction and planned programs. I'd expect Pert will have the benchmarking redone at certain intervals to measure the impact of changes. Also, on Mahoney's 'Progams' chart was: "Data Focus across all departments. New role: Data Scientist". He talked to the need for meaningful information so this would be Younger's role. I think other resouces have been added in this area. A question was asked on player mental health thru this disappointing year. Mahoney acknowledged how difficult it was and his earlier 'Programs' chart showed: 'New Leadership and Wellness Programs'. iirc he said they believed these would give us a competitive advantage. Pert added that the wellness program would be club-wide as non-football staff had to deal with many difficult issues especially when we aren't performing well. There wasn't time for detail but I had the impression it was being treated seriously. If I have time I'll go back and listen to the presentations and fill in some gaps.

Knightmare's preferred players by top 10 pick holder's before the Melb trade for pick 10. GC - Rowell GC - Anderson Mel - Jackson GWS - Ash GWS --Green-- Syd - Flanders Ade - McAsey Fre - Stephens Mel - Young Car - Weightman Whether it is Young or Kemp someone will likely slide to pick 10 depending on who Freo take at 8. Funny about all the angst on us 'allowing' GWS to potentially get Green and a top 5 player. We have just being party to Freo getting two top 10 players and Henry. No angst?:

You are probably right. We take 3 draftees then have two spots left: Bennell? Brown? or keep one free to take a DFA, someone in the SPP or in next year's mid year draft.

And we probably won't use Freo's 2020 pick 55-72 But we still effectively downgraded 26 to 28 in the trade. Not wanting to make a big deal of it but some posters keep thinking 28 is a free hit. It isn't.

I know all that. Just saying, 28 is not a free hit as some have posted. And yes many things can still happen. The net deal for #8 deal is a bit meh...

Pick 28 is not a free hit! To get 8 we gave up 26 and 50 from 2019 and our 2020 first. We have now swapped it for 28, and Freo's 2020 fourth ie 55 to 72. We have actually downgraded 26 to 28 and 50 to next year and swapped next years first for this year's #10. Its an ok deal but not something to write home about.

Not sure that is the case. There have been a huge no of picks changed hands there is no way the AFL can police those during the 5 minutes between live trades. They can't have one rule this week and another during live trade. Can anyone find a reference to the rule that says we can't do that trade with Freo.

Hmmm...why bother including Adelaide? Freo and Dees can just do 8 for 10,22. Has to be more to it. Adelaide is holding a stack of 2020 picks 2 x first, 2 x second, 0 third and 2 time fourth - one or more could be in play.

diatribe = a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something, stream of abuse. Hardly a fair description of my post. You are quite right, you and others can say whatever they like but its also fair that people present information and facts that may not be in the public domain to clarify, which I think is what I did without emotion and certainly not with anger or criticism.

I've seen barely a handful of people on DL say we didn't have an interrupted pre-season. Quite the contrary. Many just take a more balanced view. The charts Mahoney put up on injuries were but a part of a much bigger picture. So one needs to be careful of overstating their impact. The changes made off-field are recognition by the club that it wasn't just injuries/surgeries. Recognition that there were problems in many parts of our football activities. The other slides show what the club has addressed. The ones that stood out to me were (in no particular order): Coaching structure. The structure is excellent (albeit I'm not convinced of all the people in the roles). It will do a great deal for strategies/tactics, clear, un-conflicted communication to players, their roles and for their development. In turn this will help with, among other things, ball movement and reduce the confusion and loss of confidence we saw later in the season. Improved player role understanding that comes from the first item and other initiatives will be significant for the success of the game plan. Mahoney referred to the way Richmond players know their role and play their role. I got the impression we need to do better teaching. Football data analysis and meaningful presentation to coaches for strategies and tactics. Well being program not just for players but club wide Greater investment into medical and fitness Change of emphasis on recruiting Revisit aspects of the game plan. These weren't just powerpoint 'words' to appease fans at the forum. The club has been very thorough in its club review and taken action on each and every one and has programs in place. All credit to them. Some people still think our 17th position was due to surgeries and injuries while making mere passing reference to 'other issues'. By its actions the club is saying that injuries/surgeries were significant but there were bigger issues at play as evidenced by the overhaul I've summarised above. In fact, Mahoney and Goodwin virtually said we dropped the ball. Making the prelim had people (club, players, coaches) thinking it was just a few steps to a GF and then perhaps a premiership. This caused the club to lose sight of the 'fundamentals' (their word). My description of that while it might be provocative, is 'hubris'. Goodwin mentioned that after round 22 they did a 'dump' (his word) with the players where they laid everything on the table. You can bet the players and coaches weren't blaming injuries/surgeries for being 17th. I think its time fans move on from believing injuries/surgeries were the problem in 2019. The other issues collectively were much much bigger otherwise the club wouldn't be changing so much of its operations.

Or they could go into deficit this year then lose those points in the 2020 draft and the affected pick(s) slide down the order. According to 'knightmare' who is generally well informed on the draft and its rules writes: "Deficit doesn't come out of first round picks". I was a bit surprised by that. It seems the benefits for Academy and F/S clubs never end! A system of draft points introduced to force them to pay value is being watered down to where they can increasingly use third and fourth round picks to get their players. imv it looks like the draft points system has failed in its original intent.

Thanks Nasher. I'll put my hand up and say I wasn't aware of his goal kicking prowess so no problems now with him in that role. With Lewis also as a kicking coach the club has clearly identified our kicking skills as a much needed area to invest in. Those two appointments should go a long way to improve significant problems that bring our game plan undone: 1) turnovers around the ground and i50; and 2) goal kicking accuracy

Last night at the Member's Forum both Mahoney and Tim Lamb said we hold picks 3 and 8 'at the moment'. Interpreting this I would say there is a 99% chance one pick (most probably pick 8 ) will be traded. List decisions are a team effort but I would say Tim will have a very big say (maybe more than Taylor) in who we pick. No clues were given last night on who our draftees might be. Edit: Forgot to mention, Lamb was asked whether we will pick 'best available' or 'needs based'. He said it would be a balancing act which was a surprise as usually clubs go 'best' in the top 10 and also most probably in the 10-20 range. That made me think Jackson is our candidate for #3 even tho he isn't rated that highly by draft watching media scribes (eg Twomey today has him at 11). Then wherever the next pick is it will be 'best'.

Agreed. Its interesting that we didn't replace the Jennings 'strategy' role. There was a bit of talk on DL and some in the media that Yze was in the running but it didn't happen. To me it is important as that person can stand back a little from day-to-day coaching. I guess Goodwin and Richardson will do it but they already have a big gig to get us back up the ladder with a relatively inexperienced team to manage. Its interesting that we have made our AFLW and our VFL senior coaches Development Coaches for the mens' AFL team. Nothing against Radford and Stinear but they are inexperienced in their new roles and at AFL level and have demanding jobs already, especially Radford who presumably has a full time job getting our VFL team a premiership. So those guys will be working part time at best. I like the new structure but I'm not convinced that we have strengthened our coaching panel, losing Macca, Jennings and Rawlings and only adding Richardson. I'm guessing we lost 40-50 years coaching experience and gained about 15-20. Tough gig for Goodwin who is still inexperienced himself.