2017 trading, drafting, list management

[Ludwig]

Their premise was that Nankervis is a player with who plays with 'presence' and in their opinion KT, Sinclair, and Reid do not, they added NS to that but I don't think they could remember enough about the game of NS to know whether he can impose himself on a game or not. I think they might have referred to Mummy also being a ruckman with 'presence' that we traded out. They may have a point, but I don't think their discussion warranted the headline.

Their comments about Alistair Clarkson taking a leaf out of Collingwood's book of tactics on how to beat the Swans was however irritaitingly very close to the mark. How could we fall to the same tactics twice!!

It's funny how these same journo's/former players were only last week talking about how good Reid's comeback has been, with stories emerging that he was much in demand and worth 700 to 800k a year. Now, after 1 half of footy where Hawthorn had control of the ball, he's not any good and lucky to get paid 200k.

Nankervis kicked a goal in the dying minutes of a game where Richmond were already up 2 goals, then takes an uncontested mark in defence with no one near him, clearly a skill error from Essendon. There rest the game he was clearly beaten by Bellchambers, a much maligned ruckman himself. The week before, Nankervis missed taking control of the ball or stopping the play when Richmond lost the game in the dying seconds. I think Nankervis is okay, but the hype on him is ridiculous.

I do think the comments on how we played unaccountable footy against the Pies and Hawks is spot on. It's hard to place the blame for that on the coaching staff, because we didn't play that way last week. We have a leadership group that should have corrected that on the field in the 1st quarter.

[Cosmic Wizard]

Their premise was that Nankervis is a player with who plays with 'presence' and in their opinion KT, Sinclair, and Reid do not, they added NS to that but I don't think they could remember enough about the game of NS to know whether he can impose himself on a game or not. I think they might have referred to Mummy also being a ruckman with 'presence' that we traded out. They may have a point, but I don't think their discussion warranted the headline.

Their comments about Alistair Clarkson taking a leaf out of Collingwood's book of tactics on how to beat the Swans was however irritaitingly very close to the mark. How could we fall to the same tactics twice!!

AAA is normally not that good, but i think they were on the money there.

Some of a biggest pay packets of players really go unnoticed in games; never dominate a game or when we are losing win it for us.

Mostly they show us occasionally glimpses of potential, what could be.

But they are not rookie but players with 5,6, or 7 years in the system.

They include; Tippo, Reid, Rohan, Towers, Naismith (Yes he is a rookie but always injured); and also players who have gone past their use by date, Jack and McVeigh.

This is why we are losing so many game, there are too many list cloggers who chew up vast amount of our salary cap.

And we don't have any players of real speed. We should make a bid for Josh Kelly if nothing else.

This season is not a aberration; this could be the norm for a few years.

Why we didn't put McVeigh on a rookie spot and shift the money to Mitchell needs explaining.

Mitchell is the number one player for possessions, and has ten more years at the elite level.

Can we really say that for the list of players above???

[aardvark]

We lost by a point to Collingwood and a goal to Hawthorn, one kick would've made the difference in either game and we would be having a different conversation

Both of which we were long odds favorites and should have won by 6-8 goals.

[Merdo5555]

Time for a cull: Tippet gone (we will have to pay part of his salary but he is a flop); Reid if he wants more than $450K good bye his 2 or 3 good games a season not enough; McVeigh gone (too old too slow); Jack if he comes back fine from injury he plays on if not gone (we will wear cap pressure but get games into the younger players is more important). Parker if he isn't injured on the watch list (more to let him know standards must be maintained); Johnston needs to play some NEAFL games at least by the end of the season must show some good signs to keep going; Talia plays by the end of the season or gone; Brandon Jack gone (plenty of chances, might have it but not at Sydney).

Hopefully enough cap space to definitely keep Jones and sign quick outside midfielder and defender.

I think complacency is singing its merry song and a huge shake up required to let the remaining players know whats required. I don't think we will have the space for a tilt at a big name but we have shown before we do well with role players.

Before the Hawks game would have given Longmire till the end of the season, now is time to go. The one thing he hasn't done is constantly bring fresh blood into the coaching box. This leads to no Plan B or an inability to institute Plan B (i.e., a high pressing game). Either way coach isn't doing the business.

[Ludwig]

Before the Hawks game would have given Longmire till the end of the season, now is time to go. The one thing he hasn't done is constantly bring fresh blood into the coaching box. This leads to no Plan B or an inability to institute Plan B (i.e., a high pressing game). Either way coach isn't doing the business.

Longmire is contracted through 2020, and can't see him resigning or getting sacked, so you might as well get used to him being around for a while. It's worth noting that this is his 7th year of coach. He's won 2 out every 3 games and has never had a losing season. But you think he should be sacked because we lost to Hawthorn on Friday. I wonder who will pay out his salary for the next 3? years.

[Steve]

Garry Lyon's analysis is ridiculously superficial and simplistic for someone who is given the profile he has across his various media roles.

The difference with Nankervis is that he was out-of-contract - that actually makes a bit of a difference at the end of a season when he is fielding offers from other clubs (offering greater opportunity), and the other players Lyon says we should have let go instead were under contract. He could have debated the validity of signing / re-signing the likes of Sinclair and Tippett - but to suggest we had a choice of who left once we got to the end of last year and say we chose it to be Nankervis is just completely naive to how list management works.

Personally I think the bagging of Sam Reid is completely unfair also - I'm not sure how anyone can reference his goals/games ratio and use that as evidence that he's under-performed. Friday night was the perfect example - we start poorly and then Reid is sent to defence. I've been critical of Longmire for not having a Plan B - that's actually unfair - his Plan B is to send Sam Reid behind the ball. If he was left to actually function as a forward for any significant amount of time, the criticism would be fair if he wasn't delivering.

[Merdo5555]

Signing any coach to a deal more than 2 - 3 years so long is insanity as the current system shows. Tell me where was he going if we hadn't signed him up for more years . If he did so be it we get another coach, change shouldn't be feared it should be embraced. I trust the club enough that will make an astute selection.

Not its not just the loss to the Hawks, its being 3-7 and after 7 years still being unable to play a Plan B against teams who we know will play a certain way.

If i was being cruel I could also mention the failure to turn up in a GF (totally inexcusable) and losing last year because again no Plan B. We let the Bulldogs have too much uncontested footy and marks which has always killed us.

Pointing out that its 7 years confirms the biggest single problem, complacency. There has only ever been once really successful coach with long tenure, Sir Alex Ferguson and even he completely changed his assistants every 2 or 3 years. John is not in his class and nor has he changed assistants anywhere near enough.

If we finish say 5 - 17 and lose the first 5 next season are you still going to say there is no way he will be sacked. Nobody should ever feel they are irreplaceable because we all are. I think John should negotiate a move upstairs with a large element of hand=off mentoring and we should move some in from outside of the club.

Also lets not forget we overpaid Roosey to be academy coach so we could move John into the role. Lets not forget he was still getting $1m for coaching the academy and only moved on when he was told the amount was going to revert to what the role was worth. A pay-out or resignation or some other deal anything is possible.

I don't expect finals or success but I would like to play a team like Hawthorn with an approach that screams out hey we are thinking about how you consistently beat us and want to try something new.

[Blood Fever]

[QUOTE=Steve;726645]Garry Lyon's analysis is ridiculously superficial and simplistic for someone who is given the profile he has across his various media roles.

His mate Damian Barrett is just as superficial- his Sliding Doors on AFL website is a fantasy world. Neither Lyon nor Barrett have a deep understanding of any list and how each individual has performed. Trouble here in Melbourne is you have a large chunk of brainwashed supporters who dwell on every word. Number of footy journos and 'experts' is mind blowing.

[Ludwig]

I've been critical of Longmire for not having a Plan B - that's actually unfair - his Plan B is to send Sam Reid behind the ball. If he was left to actually function as a forward for any significant amount of time, the criticism would be fair if he wasn't delivering.

If we would have played Aliir instead of carrying 2 ruckmen, both of whom seemed to have failed in their jobs, then there wouldn't be a need to send Reid into defence. It was a clear admission that Longmire got the selection wrong for the game.


And Garry Lyon is too busy visiting his mates and their families to be studying club playing lists.

[caj23]

Longmire is contracted through 2020, and can't see him resigning or getting sacked, so you might as well get used to him being around for a while. It's worth noting that this is his 7th year of coach. He's won 2 out every 3 games and has never had a losing season. But you think he should be sacked because we lost to Hawthorn on Friday. I wonder who will pay out his salary for the next 3? years.

I'm not suggesting for a second that he should be sacked, but the fact that we have signed him up until the end of 2020 is a poor decision. I'm leaning to the view that we have underachieved with the squad we have had at our disposal over the last few seasons, and a lack of a second premiership during this period is a failure.

As it stands I'm happy to now play out this season for draft picks and reload for 2018, but if we have another season in this vein then where does that leave us?

[RogueSwan]

Signing any coach to a deal more than 2 - 3 years so long is insanity as the current system shows. ...

Because the media never jump on a coach when his team is going poorly. Who needs that constant speculation every two years. Stability is underrated.

...
I do think the comments on how we played unaccountable footy against the Pies and Hawks is spot on. It's hard to place the blame for that on the coaching staff, because we didn't play that way last week. We have a leadership group that should have corrected that on the field in the 1st quarter.

Agreed. Against the Saints the Swans manned up and forced turnovers out of the backline. Do the same against the Dawks and this conversation wouldn't be happening. Also. having Reid drop back in the last quarter would've been a nice option to have...

[707]

On the Couch last night pasted us for signing Tippett to such big money when he's an under delivering ruckman not a marquee forward.

Suggested we need to move him on and pay part of his salary in the hope someone will take him.

Does anyone REALLY KNOW what his contract status is, when is he signed up until? But I am happy for Tippett to return to his 2016 form before he got the LTI.

[waswan]

If putting Reid into defence and totally screwing up our fwd structure is our plan B then god help us


Alir Alir Alir

[mattybloods]

If Tippett is carrying an injury atm we should put him on the long term injury list and upgrade a rookie. He's proven that he's no good unless his body is 100% and it gives us a chance to try Edwards (probably best of the rookies atm)

[Boddo]

On the Couch last night pasted us for signing Tippett to such big money when he's an under delivering ruckman not a marquee forward.

Suggested we need to move him on and pay part of his salary in the hope someone will take him.

Does anyone REALLY KNOW what his contract status is, when is he signed up until? But I am happy for Tippett to return to his 2016 form before he got the LTI.

Signed till the end of next year. Have not heard how much he is on. Even the trash trollers in Barret n Hutchinson have not even mentioned how much he is on. So it's pretty hard to gage his salary. I call it a fail due to contract length n size due to this being his 5th year n he's only played 66 games.