Lampers

I was a co-founder of Demonology around 1997-8 for hazy memory, though I was a passenger and hardly a driving force. It was originally a merger of three small fan sites. Demon Chronicles, Hoju’s and another I can’t recall. I still play basketball with the main guy who founded the site, and lost touch with the other co-founder who ended up working at MFC for a few years and I still see him on LinkedIn.

Agree, if Melbourne hand out a smashing (100+) it may be a bad sign as that probably means the backline getting cute and not maintaining their discipline to hold structure and a bit of glory seeking over team work further up the ground. And while that might be a valid risk to take in this game, you’d want them to snap back against the more likely tougher opposition yet to come and not create any bad habits. I’d prefer a consistent style 40 point win than a free wheeling structure disregarding 100 point win.* * I’d take a free wheeling 187 point win however.** ** This is Melbourne, I’d take a 1 point win.

Brown has 18 games at Bellerive which is second only to Marvel for games played in his career. So he’s definitely got familiarity on his side. But he doesn’t dominate there. 35 goals at an average of 1.94 @ 61.4% accuracy compared to an average of 2.25 @ 68.1% at all other venues. Jarrad Waite has a slightly better record based on averages there. Marvel with 2.62 goals @ 70.3% is where he excels, so if he’s not in before the Bulldogs game in round 11 he must come in for that one if his VFL form holds, especially as the Dogs are undersized in the backline.

Most teams given the sub rule now run a quasi-emergency who will play limited minutes in the VFL if that game is before the AFL game. Contingency in case someone twangs a hammy in the warm up there is a player who isn’t completly cooked able to come in.

I think you have points with the parts of your post I deleted about Jackson’s kicking being sub-par (although not many rucks are great kicks). Unless Jackson really starts to labour and his form falls off a cliff, I can’t see him being the one who makes way in the name of team balance. I think the coaches are in love with the tactical flexibility he provides. 100% Ben Brown and Weideman are better forwards than Jackson but Jackson bringing the ball is providing a contest even though he’s not kicking the goals - that’s critical to enable Pickett and Spargo to go to work. Either of Ben Brown, Weideman or McDonald can do a job in the ruck to spell Gawn, but only Jackson can completely change the ruck and midfield dynamics when he goes in there. Given Brown’s knee troubles they may not want to risk throwing him in the ruck either because that invites the additional front-on knee contact. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Jackson remain in the team a bit further up the ground on a flank once one or both of Ben Brown and Weideman are in as he has the agility to do that. Another option to squeeze so many talls in is to further exploit Langdon, May, Lever and Tomlinson’s ability to play near 100% game time and have one of the talls on the bench at any time. West Coast had years they consistently played Naitanui at around 60% game time albeit due to his lack of endurance rather than a way to jam more talls in - but the result is similar with West Coast often forced to get another tall into the team to accomodate Naitanui who provided them a huge tactical advantage in bursts. McDonald is the one under the pump in my eyes as he’s not kicked a bag of goals for years now, has poor field kicking, poor agility, and his legendary endurance doesn’t seem to be what it once was either. In good form right now though. These are all great problems to have, a couple of injuries or a couple of these talls struggling form wise and it will be back to the panic of just before the start of the season.

I like these changes given the forced outs and the opposition. Unless there’s a time machine to get late 2017 and all of 2018 Melksham back, Mitch Brown is the most similar player we have to Fritsch as a pretty pure lead-up forward in style despite being much taller, so that makes sense when trying to preserve the current structure. Hibberd provides more flexibility than 2021 version Jetta. In prior years I would’ve said Jetta had superior agility, but even though Hibberd is on rails sometimes for agility it’s on par with Jetta these days. The two Hawks forwards that worry me are Breust, who has been a bit flat this year, and Wingard who has been mostly a mid. Amongst Hunt, Rivers, Hibberd and Salem I think there’s enough options for those two. Petty for May was the only realistic call his excellent preseason form and given Hore is injured and I guess Smith is regaining form. Hawks look quite weak for tall forwards, and have dropped Ceglar. Given there’s no obvious tall threat, maybe Petty can take who May would’ve and then Tomlinson and Lever can keep doing their thing to minimise disruption in the backline.

I was thinking of something similar the other day. If Melbourne’s goals were behinds, and their behind goals, and the same for their opponents, it would be: Melbourne For : 58.50.398. Against : 25.39.189 A percentage of 210! It’s a pretty unsophisticated analysis though. I think the opposition’s accuracy is more because when Melbourne’s defensive structure gets cracked, it fails bad and gives up relatively easy shots, but it doesn’t crack that often.

I’d be interested to see how much involvement Melbourne had in his development, probably not a great deal, so can’t really complain if he can’t be picked up on the cheap. I have involvement on the committee of my kids’ local footy team and got an email (paraphrasing). ”Hi, I’m with St.Kilda’s NGA. Do you have any registered players that fit this criteria?” and our club isn’t even in St. Kilda’s NGA catchment zone. Looks like they just sweep up kids already registered at junior footy and trial them for a development squad - that doesn’t seem to be encouraging new players given thy are trying to pick the eyes out of kids who had already decided to play footy. Maybe the clubs are doing more and I haven’t seen it, but my club is in Collingwood’s NGA zone and we have a very high Asian demographic and consequently do struggle to tap into those communities for players. We have not had any involvement or assistance from Collingwood or the AFL targeting those groups to get them interested in footy and have had no junior registrations due to NGA or AFL initiatives. NGA really does appear to be a bit of a rort.

I’m certainly concerned with the clear lack of athleticism. So even if Jetta doesn’t get exposed like the Cats game, which I think he did against Toby Greene whom admittedly is a hell of a player, you can just see Jetta is a further step off the pace. Jetta was never quick, but was agile, and that seems gone now. I think Jetta has done quite well to adjust and is playing more within his physical limitations this year. Last year he was still flying for marks or spoils like he did in his glory years, but he was almost never getting pulling them off and worse often spoiled a teammate. He’s stopped trying those this year. Finally, he has very reliable disposal but he is super conservative, usually goes sideways or backwards, has almost no penetration on his kicks and therefore doesn’t provide any meaningful drive or offence. In summary, I think Jetta is doing OK but there’s lots of writing on the wall and he’s just hanging in there. There’s no replacement banging down the door though, so until there is or Jetta gets exposed badly a few times he will stay in. I have similar concerns with Jones, he has really dropped off physically as you’d expect given his age. Even though his skills and decision making has been pretty solid this year, he just can’t apply the pressure that a Sparrow or Jordon or Spargo can. I recall one time against the Cats he looked like he was running in treacle as a Cats player streaked away from Jones on the wing. Jones probably would never have been able to go with him even in his younger days, but it was a very laboured “chase”. There are more options to replace Jones than there are Jetta so it will be interesting to see what happens once he hits 300 games. I think the obsession around replacing Jetta (and Jones to a lesser extent) is about not waiting until these pretty clear things have really hurt or even cost a game before pulling the trigger. Both those guys ideally should be depth and injury cover, not first choice 22 IMO.

Goodwin was so emphatic in his “No” when asked about possibility of TMac going into the backline. That clearly will only happen in a disaster moment with in-game injuries. On Jackson, he is so important for in-game tactical possibilities he would have to stink it up massively to get dropped. Jackson’s presence allows Gawn to play whatever role the team most benefits from on based on the in-game situation, be it deep forward, rucking and dropping into the backline, or rucking and hanging about down the line as a bail out. Also Jackson is so different as a ruck to Gawn with what he brings at ground level that it surely must cause headaches for opponents to switch how they play. Weideman or Brown or TMac or whoever else could spell Gawn wouldn’t create that degree of disruption for the opposition.

Barring a massive form drop, I can’t see Jackson getting moved out of the team. No doubt Ben Brown and Weideman are better forwards, but Jackson can at least compete down there and would be averaging a goal per game if his kicking had been a bit better. But Jackson provides such a tactical point of difference with Gawn it’s a huge advantage for Melbourne. Jackson’s presence enables Gawn to play whatever role is most advantageous on the day and in response to how the opposition is playing. Neither Brown or Weideman can provide that ruck cut out who can double up as an on baller. As rucks they are both like Gawn in style, but far less capable. they are both either forwards or inferior cut out rucks and nothing else, so having both relatively inflexible players in the team isn’t ideal. But Jackson brings something so different in style to Gawn that it’s very difficult for opponents to plan and structure for both Gawn and Jackson. I would assume one of Brown or Weideman will come in for McDonald as while Mcdonad has been ok in a couple of games, I doubt he’s going to explode. For all the talk of McDonald on a wing or going back into defence, I just don’t see it as there are clearly superior options in both areas now. Unless Weideman really dominates in the VFL I’d think Brown would get first chance. Historically he’s a far better forward than Weideman. Fritsch needs to stay in, he’s a really good mid sized forward and can play as a more ground level forward if required, plus provides flexibility in game as he can move onto the wing or even half back. It was not long ago Daw was being talked about here as needing to be rushed in due to tall forward emergency, and now we are at the embarrassment of riches stage. It won’t take much for a couple of injuries or form slumps to get back to only one or two viable choices again.

Fair points. I’d be hope either of Viney (compensation) or Brayshaw (trade) would’ve netted a pick ~15 for a team wanting to bolster the midfield immediately, maybe that’s too optimistic. There’s also the benefit of exiting significant dollars off the list as I think there’s an over investment for what’s being returned from Brayshaw and Viney right now. Those dollars either enables a play for an established needs player from a club looking to rebuild and would accept that ~15 pick in return. Or front load some existing contracts and use that ~15 to draft a highly skilled player as an 18 yo is more likely to be able to contribute on the outside rather than needing preseasons to build up their size and strength to contribute on the inside. Given we’ve got this list, I’d keep Brayshaw and Viney as permanent on ballers as I don’t see their versatility to be very effective elsewhere, and alternate Oliver and Petracca as mid/forwards as I’m confident Oliver, now he can mark overhead again, and Petracca (proven) could each be very dangerous in that role. On the wing? Not sure, maybe one of McDonald, ANB, Bedford or Rosman who all have good endurance, maybe one of them just running all day out there and keeping width knowing that their disposal is iffy. Or try Laurie or Bowey who I’m sure have poorer endurance but allegedly highly skilled.

I still think a list management trick was missed and there’s a danger of Dom Tyson-ing Brayshaw as I don’t think wing suits his best qualities and could end up destroying any trade value and also Brayshaw’s engagement. Taking emotion out of it, I thought one of Viney or Brayshaw should’ve gone at the end of last year as we have one too many frontline quality inside midfielders. Yes there is injury history with Viney and Brayshaw, but with Sparrow and Jordon waiting in the wings surely there was enough depth to let the surplus player that could get good value in return and try to use that value to fill a more immediate need.

Agree, reminds me of the rolling mauls of junior footy or basketball where everyone ball hunts. Hungry dogs going at a piece of meat. I can’t believe Yze can’t see it and doesn’t give the feedback, and numerous commentators called out Melbourne getting pushed close into the contest by Freo. Maybe there’s some subtle genius tactic of increasing predictability by allowing comprehensive clearance defeats... probably not. It does assist the intercept mark statistics.

Tigers with 100k members vs. Carlton probably at 60k and they got a 49k crowd. One reigning premier the other talked up to make finals. Collingwood and Dogs combined membership well over 120k and they got 46k crowd. Both made finals last year. I get that those other crowds may have been close to sell out given capacity restrictions, but Demons who have been slagged off since the Bulldogs game in the media vs. interstate team and people are surprised by 21k?

Try scrolling down and selecting General Reserve tickets.

Definitely need to keep perspective. If Melbourne ran a midfield of Petracca, Oliver, Viney and Brayshaw all game and the Bulldogs were running with their equivalents of AVB, Jones and Sparrow (Petracca aside) I’d be concerned with only a 40 point win. To be fair 60 points would’ve better reflected the game. Yes it would’ve been good to see better stopping ability from those second and even third stringers, and Langdon’s butchery was frustrating. But one team was taking that pretty seriously personnel wise and the other seems to be (hopefully by choice) nursing through to round 1.

I’m guessing this is code for lack of defensive mindset from those four primary on ballers, and if it’s in both papers simultaneously it does seem like a plant coming from the club to send those players a message. Petracca and Oliver have the physical tools to be effective forwards. Petracca has proved this many times and Oliver has in flashes and now his shoulders seem to be better his marking should be back. I wonder if Oliver is willing to play forward, or willing do enough of the defensive things when on ball. There has long been noise that while he’s a hard worker, he isn’t the easiest to coach as he is so head strong and competitive. Viney and Brayshaw I’m a bit more concerned they have athletic limitations that mean I’m not sure where they can play and be effective when not on ball. Brayshaw was tried on a wing which exposed his pace weakness and nullified his strength or winning contested ball, but Brayshaw does seem to have some decent goal sense so maybe he can play half forward. Viney has been tried up forward and never really did much but had some good games as a tagger in the past but more recently he seems to want to be an attacking mid and he just doesn’t have the foot skills for it. I thought it was the right time to lose one of Viney or Brayshaw this past off season given the lack of positional flexibility they provide, Sparrow and Jordon seemed to be coming on for depth, plus freeing up cap room and getting some draft capital in via a trade but not to be. I’d make Viney and Harmes rotate as the defensive/tagging mid, and let Petracca and Oliver focus on being attacking until the opponent shows they are causing too much damage. If the opposition is getting on top in clearances, both Viney and Harmes in the for a more conservative defensive setup with only one of Oliver or Petracca in there focussing on being attacking while the other goes forward - which doesn’t leave much room for Brayshaw except in case of injury or giving cut outs here and there. I’m sure Yze will have far more sophisticated things in mind than my thoughts, but the true test will be if the match committee have the courage of their convictions to drop those star mids if they continually fail to follow instructions.

Mahoney gone. Larkin gone. I think that’s the last of PJ’s mates clique gone.

I recall a story that Daw was banned from doing upper body weights at North, and still looks like that. I know what that’s like... Point being I’m not sure if he can drop weight and be more mobile.

Too true. I recall dropping into the first training session when Jimmy Toumpas came to the club. If memory serves the four new players were doing drills together and I reckon it was Terlich, Matt Jones and one other (maybe Georgiou?). So Toumpas was super impressive, hitting every kick, clean hands, while the others were quite sloppy. I thought “We’ve got one here!”...

My guess is Melbourne will be keeping spot on the list open for after draft day, be them main list or rookie, given the unusually high amount of quality available from DFA given the list shrinkages, plus the precedent of prior years where Melbourne have added players just before the season and mid year. I think this means we will see some more delistings, perhaps Bedford or Chandler or maybe KK as I doubt any would be snapped up by another club so Melbourne could just redraft them ultimately. I also guess that Melbourne will be trying to take advantage on draft day during live trading if they can’t package two picks into one earlier pick to move up the order prior to the draft. I wouldn’t be surprised if another club is willing to trade for Melbourne’s picks live during the draft when they know it will for sure get them a “slider”, and in exchange give up something potentially better in the 2021 draft. The risk for Melbourne is other clubs knowing Melbourne may not really want to use some of their 2020 picks and so trying to low ball for them. As confusing as the live trading and future pick trading and rule restrictions are for the average Joe, it really does open up possibilities and make the Mahoneys and Taylors or the world work for their money. I reckon the next step is allowing just drafted players to be part of a trading window immediately after the draft concludes. The drafted player should have no say in proceedings. AFLPA surely can’t have a problem with that as 24 hours earlier the player had no choice in where they were drafted to so it’s just an extension and it will create even more opportunity for list managers to improve their list.

Have you listened to the Sacked podcast. Very hard to reconcile what he says against a what is happening and come up with an innocent explanation.

If you listen to the Sacked podcast with Beams what he says in that aligns with the above. He also says it was his choice to retire, and he is retired. He also says Collingwood have been very supportive. HOWEVER, something isn’t adding up. If he is in good faith retired, why is he expecting more money when he has chosen to not fulfil his end of the bargain? I can think of a couple of reasons. Collingwood want to spread his contract out over several years as irrespective of real dollars out the door the AFL is making sure the contract hits the cap, and a Beams retirement bring forward the remaining contract amounts into the current year. Beams is trying to screw Collingwood for every cent he can, and is using an argument that his retirement is illness related and either Collingwood or the AFL have fault in his illness (i.e. workplace injury).

I’ve been trying to reverse engineer Melbourne’s approach based on what we can see. This is what I think it is. List management is a multi year discipline and includes contracts, drafting, trading, free agency, current list development projections, junior footballer development projections and finally industry assumptions (e.g. salary cap increases). There are a hell of a lot of assumptions and guesses in there. As time progresses assumptions become less risky as you learn more. Melbourne appear to want to position themselves where they hold the least risk (i.e. highest confidence on likely outcomes) and away from high risk. They engineer this by looking for market imbalances - which is often enabled by the bidding system which means different clubs place significantly different value on the same pick. You see this in securing proven players for identified needs (Langdon, Tomlinson which hasn’t worked out but still illustrates the point) which is not certainty, but close to it. You see this in the willingness to trade out of the following year’s draft (lots of uncertainty about junior players, order of draft picks, future development of the current list and therefore future gaps) and into the nearest draft where there is less uncertainty. Only to repeat that the next year. You see it in targeting very specific players like Pickett and then using pick swaps that are win-win to secure that targeted player, but also not over pay. Not a bullet proof approach as pick 1 is the only way to secure who you want for sure. It’s quite a sophisticated approach and requires the confidence to be seen to “pay overs” by some commentators and not get spooked. I think this contrasts to an Essendon, who appear to go down the flashy messiah signing, and bravado approach that requires every trade to be “I win, you lose”. I’m happier with Melbourne’s approach.