List changes and trade bait

[0918330512]

Paul Roos was seen meeting with Heriter today. The Demons are looking for a ball player off half back and this is what led to the Malceski speculation.

I wonder if the Demons make the move on Heriter whether they would still go for Malceski.

Are you serious? With Melbourne's season, they should be making a move on about 20 players ... & perhaps take a leaf out of Tom Hafey's book & bring Nick Davis out of retirement runners duties to emulate his dad ... heck even bring Craig Davis out of retirement ... he might even be an improvement to the Dees woes!

[Ludwig]

I believe it is our specialist defenders that we need to recruit in. Players that were previously known as half-back defenders are now really midfielders. When looking at the age of our defenders (and sorry if I have missed some);

Richards, T 31
Grundy 28
Smith 26
Rampe 24
Shaw 33
Laidler 25
Johnson 22
Richards, Z 21
Walsh 26
Aliir 20

If we group these players into age groups

Age 19 ? 23 = 3 players
Age 24 ? 28 = 5 players
Age 29-33 = 2 players

It is clear to me if we are going to continue the natural progression of development, we are a little short in our younger defensive brigade. If we analyse this younger group further, we have Z Richards who could come on, Johnson who could be great but is injury prone to date, and Aliir who is still learning his craft as a defender. It is evident to me there is big risk in this area. Therefore, we need to bring in young defensive players either through the draft or by trading. I would be looking at some of the GWS defenders that have recently put up their hand to be traded back to VIC. See if they can be enticed over the bridge. We definitely do not need Lumumba or Frawley. I would also like to see Walsh offered another year. As he looks promising as a key defender.

We are far from desperate in key defender area, but you are correct in that it is the one potential weakness going forward. The last four on your list, Johnson, Xav, Walsh and Allir will determine how it goes. I agree that we should give Walsh another year as he's finished off the season so well. If any 2 of these can come through I think we will be fine in the KPD department.

Another reason why any talk of Reid being traded is crazy. With Tippo and Buddy the forward line is locked up and one of the best in the league, so Sam can always go back if need be. It's great insurance to have.

There's a very good chance that we will add Abe Davis to the KPP list this draft and probably another one as well, so your list is likely to grow a bit.

If as expected, we draft Josh Dunkley next year, we might have yet another KPD. At 17 he's looking pretty big already. I know he's classified as a midfielder, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's already around 190 cm. So there's a very good chance he'll be over 192 by the time he's 21. Perhaps a real Father like Son selection.

[ShockOfHair]

Good point. If Roos is having breakfast with Lumumba that gives us hope on Malceski. Although an hour in Heri's presence may have convinced Roos to stay away from him permanently.

[churry]

If as expected, we draft Josh Dunkley next year, we might have yet another KPD. At 17 he's looking pretty big already. I know he's classified as a midfielder, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's already around 190 cm. So there's a very good chance he'll be over 192 by the time he's 21. Perhaps a real Father like Son selection.

Wouldn't mind a 192cm midfielder! At that size though he could be anything.

[Meg]

Wouldn't mind a 192cm midfielder! At that size though he could be anything.

Adam Goodes?

[Ludwig]

Adam Goodes?

There's a photo of Josh and Adam on Josh's Twitter account. I think it was taken last year. He only looks a few cms. shorter than Adam. Here's one writeup on Josh from earlier in the year. I think the the height and weight were taken while he was still 16. There's something about him (perhaps the name) that says 'Fullback'.

Josh Dunkley (Gippsland Power)
Son of: Andrew
Height: 188cms
Weight: 84kgs
Position: Midifelder
2014 Games: 5
Average Stats: 21 disposals, 3.4 marks, 6.6 tackles
Draft Eligible: 2015
Don?t believe the media beat up regarding the falling out between Andrew Dunkley and the Swans ? because it will not affect Josh following in his fathers footsteps. The physically built Josh Dunkley, is a ripper prospect who on first glance, looks ready to be drafted this year. Dunkley has been playing senior football for Sale for the past few seasons and is physically match hardened. The high production ball winner hasn?t put a foot wrong this year for the mid-table Gippsland Power and it?s crazy to think he?s just turned 17. Running at 67 per cent disposal efficiency this season, Dunkley?s strengths lay in his tackling and his kicking, whist his ability to impact the clearances and stoppages verge on elite. The Under 16 vice-captain last season earned All-Australian selection at the Under 16 National Championships.

[ugg]

Dunkley?s strengths lay in his tackling and his kicking,

A sentence I thought id never see

[Matt80]

There's a photo of Josh and Adam on Josh's Twitter account. I think it was taken last year. He only looks a few cms. shorter than Adam. Here's one writeup on Josh from earlier in the year. I think the the height and weight were taken while he was still 16. There's something about him (perhaps the name) that says 'Fullback'.

Josh Dunkley (Gippsland Power)
Son of: Andrew
Height: 188cms
Weight: 84kgs
Position: Midifelder
2014 Games: 5
Average Stats: 21 disposals, 3.4 marks, 6.6 tackles
Draft Eligible: 2015
Don?t believe the media beat up regarding the falling out between Andrew Dunkley and the Swans ? because it will not affect Josh following in his fathers footsteps. The physically built Josh Dunkley, is a ripper prospect who on first glance, looks ready to be drafted this year. Dunkley has been playing senior football for Sale for the past few seasons and is physically match hardened. The high production ball winner hasn?t put a foot wrong this year for the mid-table Gippsland Power and it?s crazy to think he?s just turned 17. Running at 67 per cent disposal efficiency this season, Dunkley?s strengths lay in his tackling and his kicking, whist his ability to impact the clearances and stoppages verge on elite. The Under 16 vice-captain last season earned All-Australian selection at the Under 16 National Championships.

Sounds like he is a Josh Kennedy.

There is a midfield quartet of Hewitt, Mills, Heeney and Dunkley about to break through. Those players are all within two years of each other.

In four years time they will be running through the midfield with Hannanberry, Parker, Lloyd, Jones and Cunninham.

That midfield could well be better than what we have now.

[Flying South]

Sounds like he is a Josh Kennedy.

There is a midfield quartet of Hewitt, Mills, Heeney and Dunkley about to break through. Those players are all within two years of each other.

In four years time they will be running through the midfield with Hannanberry, Parker, Lloyd, Jones and Cunninham.

That midfield could well be better than what we have now.

Don't forget Mitchell

[mcs]

Don't forget Mitchell

He's already been traded in Matt80's book Flying South, he is being left out quite on purpose

[Doctor]

Does that mean that any Essendon player who was at the club in 2011 and 2012 can claim a breach of contract and get out of their deals?

This is who the Swans could target and it would cost nothing, but salary cap. These are good players:

Patrick Ryder
Michael Hurley
Cale Hooker
Jake Carsle
David Zararkis
Dyson Heppell

It?s a buffet, a smorgasbord!

You Beauty!

The top three targets should be Ryder (Ruckman), Carlisle (Key Back) and David Zarharakis (midfield speed).

I think we only have a chance to get one. Ryder would be the top pick, followed by Carlsile.

As a front office thinking guy, I get where you're coming from with all of your speculation Matt, I'd just make it a little clearer that it's speculative than definitive if I were you. Having said that, I would take Carlisle over Ryder any day of the week. In terms of the Ryder trade though, media leaks suggest he wants to go to Brisbane under the Darren Jolly clause. That means that any move we plan to make should capitalise on that rather than hijack it. In other words, how can we help Brisbane get Ryder, either with salary cap relief or via managing the numbers on their list, or both. I agree that Leuenberger is injury prone but I also agree that our ruck stocks are painfully thin and we are making do at the moment. I need to think futher on it before offering a solution now, but that's how I would be approaching this.

[Doctor]

A sentence I thought id never see

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

[Doctor]

OK. I've read all this stuff now and I think I've got a handle on it, but I'm still on Sydney time and am in Perth about to head home on a red eye to Sydney again, and I've had a couple of "confidence builders", but I'm sure that isn't having an impact on my thoughts here.

In essence, it seems like we want to give as little away as we possibly can, while gaining as much as we possibly can. How am I doing so far?

In all seriousness, we, as fans, tend to speculate year to year, but a highly professional front office (such as ours from what I can gather) will be planning much further ahead than that, while also being flexible if things change and the best players in the competition decide they want to move north because their girlfriends live here, or if your best ruckman wants to move south because his wife tells him he has to (hypothetically).

I am sure that we are planning for what to do about Ted and Reg. I'm also sure that we are planning what to do about our ruck stocks, which is our most immediate concern. We've managed this year but we've been lucky. TD carried us manfully when Pyke went down but he has been paying the price of those efforts ever since. Pyke has done a great job but most of us agree that he was a better ruckman when working in conjuction with the 2014 Kevin Sheedy Medal winner. The question is, what now? The other question for us fans is, who cares? Let's ride this thing out for another 4 weeks and revel in what we're doing THIS YEAR and trust in our club to be thinking about next year, as they showed us they were doing already in the last 2 years. Speculate away, but trust Ireland, Longmire and Pridham. I do.

[Matt80]

He's already been traded in Matt80's book Flying South, he is being left out quite on purpose

This is the strategic way I see it MCS. Imagine the start of season 2018.

Mills, Dunkley and Hewitt are insider midfielders without electric line breaking speed. They are Sam Mitchills and Josh Kennedys. Great tacklers, good hard ball winners, great vision and great distribution. They link up with Luke Parker who this stage is the best inside midfielder in the AFL.

You have four inside midfielders. That is enough.

If you had Mitchell that would make the team too slow and I think his distribution skills will not be as strong as Hewitt, Mills or Dunkley. I would value reserve experts such as Ugg or Liz rating Tom Mitchell's distribution skills compared to Hewitt, Dunkley and Mills.

You then have Heeney who has more pace and can play inside and outside depending on requirements. He has Dangerfield potential, but is probably not quite as quick as Danger.

Zak Jones has become as strong as Nick Smith down back, but can also be the teams best lock down midfielder. He is Crowley, but with more pace and more skill.

Hannanberry is your gut runner who can also play inside and outside. Having left the food fights and car crashes long behind, he and Parker are the father figures of this midfield.

You then have Cunningham's blistering pace and outside run and Lloyds wonderful delivery and gut running. Rohan sometimes is rotated off half back to lay some stinging midfield tackles and give some additional outside run.

Wait there is more. Josh Kennedy and K. Jack are playing more as permanent forwards, but can still be rotated through the midfield in short bursts like Adam Goodes can.

How can you see Mitchell fitting into this blueprint? We will probably have another tall swingman like a Hugh Goddard for his trade.

This post is pure speculation, but there is some thinking behind it. Maybe my picture is optimistic on Heeney, Mills, Hewitt and Dunkley. Let's see. Eddie and Buckley would take those four in a heat beat.

[mcs]

This is the strategic way I see it MCS. Imagine the start of season 2018.

Mills, Dunkley and Hewitt are insider midfielders without electric line breaking speed. They are Sam Mitchills and Josh Kennedys. Great tacklers, good hard ball winners, great vision and great distribution. They link up with Luke Parker who this stage is the best inside midfielder in the AFL.

You have four inside midfielders. That is enough.

If you had Mitchell that would make the team too slow and I think his distribution skills will not be as strong as Hewitt, Mills or Dunkley. I would value reserve experts such as Ugg or Liz rating Tom Mitchell's distribution skills compared to Hewitt, Dunkley and Mills.

You then have Heeney who has more pace and can play inside and outside depending on requirements. He has Dangerfield potential, but is probably not quite as quick as Danger.

Zak Jones has become as strong as Nick Smith down back, but can also be the teams best lock down midfielder. He is Crowley, but with more pace and more skill.

Hannanberry is your gut runner who can also play inside and outside. Having left the food fights and car crashes long behind, he and Parker are the father figures of this midfield.

You then have Cunningham's blistering pace and outside run and Lloyds wonderful delivery and gut running. Rohan sometimes is rotated off half back to lay some stinging midfield tackles and give some additional outside run.

Wait there is more. Josh Kennedy and K. Jack are playing more as permanent forwards, but can still be rotated through the midfield in short bursts like Adam Goodes can.

How can you see Mitchell fitting into this blueprint? We will probably have another tall swingman like a Hugh Goddard for his trade.

This post is pure speculation, but there is some thinking behind it. Maybe my picture is optimistic on Heeney, Mills, Hewitt and Dunkley. Let's see. Eddie and Buckley would take those four in a heat beat.

The crazy bit with your analysis is that your completely assuming Heeney, Mills and Hewitt are all going to make it, before a single one of them has played a game, and your completely writing off Mitchell after he has played what about 25 games. Surely Mitchell, in your postulations, would be the perfect example of why we shouldn't just throw all our eggs in the Heeney, Mills and Hewitt. I think most would say that, due to his injuries, he hasn't quite lived up to expectations at the AFL level so far. But then most seasoned AFL judges say it takes at least 50 games before most players are genuinely comfortable at the level, and Mitchell is yet to have a proper pre-season at the club (they have all been injured impacted).

It only takes us to trade Mitchell, then find one of Heeney, Mills and Hewitt don't make it, and your so called 'masterplan' has left us with a gaping hole in the list because we have traded away a very good player on the basis of a 'whim'. Don't listen to the 'Great Australian Eddie' when thinking about Heeney and Mills in particular - we all know they are great at junior level, but plenty have failed to make the transition. Look at our long tradition of Dud 1st round draft picks if you want some evidence.

You are putting a lot of emphasis on the development of 3 unknowns in terms of their AFL credentials. And remember - our Premiership window is not 2018 - it is NOW and the next couple of seasons. Whilst Heeney, Mills or Hewitt may have a role to play in those seasons, they aren't central to the planning for that. Teams need depth, and it is clear that Mitchell, whilst not in the top 22 today perhaps, is clearly the next midfielder in line. Give him some luck, and a full pre-season without interruption and in 2015, he will be in our top 22 - mark my words.

Your blueprint is assuming a hell of a lot of things..... just remember how much our gameplan changed between 2005 and 2012 - a period only 3 years long then the one your postulating about. Just because we have your so called 'electric speed' model now, doesn't mean things won't have moved a long way by 2018.