Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

I'm not sure why but I thought we paused a bit and Deledio went with GWS. I don't believe we passed on him but we might have.

We've missed a few players that ultimately worked out for us but I wonder what role we really wanted him for?

That's a good question. I'd guess with the flexible types, the closest thing would be Suckling or JJ's role, and I'd have both ahead of him. We would have had to play one less inside/outside mid.

It's interesting the last two years. We didn't pull off these two first round trades and have ended up with Dunkley, Collins & English. Lord almighty that's worked out well for us.

With Dal's record, we should be really playing the free agency market as hard as we can if its about bringing in mature talent.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

That's a good question. I'd guess with the flexible types, the closest thing would be Suckling or JJ's role, and I'd have both ahead of him. We would have had to play one less inside/outside mid.

It's interesting the last two years. We didn't pull off these two first round trades and have ended up with Dunkley, Collins & English. Lord almighty that's worked out well for us.

With Dal's record, we should be really playing the free agency market as hard as we can if its about bringing in mature talent.

I know you have regularly pushed the free agent barrow, but I find that confusing when we look at Dal's record.

The free agency path puts increased pressure on the salary cap, but going to the draft allows a continual renewal with cheaper emerging talent.

If we draft and develop we can afford to spend the dollars on retaining our talent.

Why not let Dalrymple do his thing picking the eyes out of the draft and allow are trading to be based around just improving the picks he has to work with.

[MrMahatma]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

I know you have regularly pushed the free agent barrow, but I find that confusing when we look at Dal's record.

The free agency path puts increased pressure on the salary cap, but going to the draft allows a continual renewal with cheaper emerging talent.

If we draft and develop we can afford to spend the dollars on retaining our talent.

Why not let Dalrymple do his thing picking the eyes out of the draft and allow are trading to be based around just improving the picks he has to work with.

And whatever we're paying him, double it.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

I know you have regularly pushed the free agent barrow, but I find that confusing when we look at Dal's record.

The free agency path puts increased pressure on the salary cap, but going to the draft allows a continual renewal with cheaper emerging talent.

If we draft and develop we can afford to spend the dollars on retaining our talent.

Why not let Dalrymple do his thing picking the eyes out of the draft and allow are trading to be based around just improving the picks he has to work with.

I struggle with this a little bit. The teams that have been at the top for some time have used free agency and trade really well. Hawthorn, Geelong & Sydney have done it better than most. Some big dollar players, others not so.

There's little point stockpiling nothing but kids because eventually they leave for better opportunities. It's not just salary cap, it's players getting opportunities or a lack of them and leaving. Losing Hrovat (first rounder) for half a ham sandwich a year later and Higgins (to free agency, a first rounder) for a compo second pick (and others like Hamling & Stevens, we wanted to keep Tutt too) seems to leave us in a constant cycle. This year we will likely see Hamilton & Honeychurch gone, and perhaps another serious offer at Jong, Adams and others.

Free agency can be getting a marquee player, or alternatively getting good talent at a great price and keeping your draft picks. Grabbing Suckling for free and only $330,000 a year was a great move for us. As Waite was for North, Frawley & Vickery may be for Hawks, Betts certainly is at Adelaide etc. Cloke was essentially a free agent too, and only around $220,000. We get to improve our talent profile, and keep our draft picks. Spending 2-4% of the cap extra to bring in talent and keep our picks is surely an advantage. Is 2-4% going to break the bank? Likely not.

I think we agree that Dal and our picks is a great marriage. Where I differ is that I see an offer whereby we give up an end of draft, draft pick for a talented player for a bit extra cap isn't a negative. Two of our arguable Round 1 team are free agents (Clokes being as good as). Whether it's Fyffe type if the cap is increased, or a solid player at good price, I think a strategic use of a talent improving mechanism is a good thing. Evidently, three of the top four sides in 2016 think similarly and to an extent with Suckling & Cloke, we do too.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

Suckling and Coke were good pickups that complement the list. At the same time we have also used the draft.

Recent history has Geelong, Hawthorn and particularly North Melbourne, effectively shunning the draft to bring in free agents/high profile trades. I see all 3 as being inferior in 2017 to where they have previously been. I consider all 3 to be not genuine chances this year.

Even Sydney with the high profile recruits have struggled with salary cap space. They have been fortunate with the Academy pickups bringing young talent in. It seems that they elected to go the draft last year, when they were unable to retain Tom Mitchell.

I prefer what we have done, with lower profile needs based mature players. Obviously Tom Boyd was our big play, but we need to avoid the continual expensive free agent approach. I really believe that continual renewal is essential and renewal does not come unless you are adding new growth (that is the draft). The adage is draft for talent and trade for needs.

[Twodogs]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

Suckling and Coke were good pickups that complement the list. At the same time we have also used the draft.

Recent history has Geelong, Hawthorn and particularly North Melbourne, effectively shunning the draft to bring in free agents/high profile trades. I see all 3 as being inferior in 2017 to where they have previously been. I consider all 3 to be not genuine chances this year.

Even Sydney with the high profile recruits have struggled with salary cap space. They have been fortunate with the Academy pickups bringing young talent in. It seems that they elected to go the draft last year, when they were unable to retain Tom Mitchell.

I prefer what we have done, with lower profile needs based mature players. Obviously Tom Boyd was our big play, but we need to avoid the continual expensive free agent approach. I really believe that continual renewal is essential and renewal does not come unless you are adding new growth (that is the draft). The adage is draft for talent and trade for needs.

I agree with the renewal theme BJ. I've just finished Norm Smith's biography and the turnover of players in a team that won five premierships out of six from 1955-60 was pretty high. It's not like he had a core group of 15 players that played in every flag and he squeezed the last drop of talent. He was chopping and changing and bringing kids in each year at the cost of putting established stars' nose out of joint-blokes like Athol Webb and Don Williams left after '59 because Smith wouldn't play Webb as a full forward and Williams started as 19th man in the '59 Grand Final. Most of those years he won those five flags he was putting easily the youngest teams of all the clubs out on the field.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

Suckling and Coke were good pickups that complement the list. At the same time we have also used the draft.

Recent history has Geelong, Hawthorn and particularly North Melbourne, effectively shunning the draft to bring in free agents/high profile trades. I see all 3 as being inferior in 2017 to where they have previously been. I consider all 3 to be not genuine chances this year.

Even Sydney with the high profile recruits have struggled with salary cap space. They have been fortunate with the Academy pickups bringing young talent in. It seems that they elected to go the draft last year, when they were unable to retain Tom Mitchell.

I prefer what we have done, with lower profile needs based mature players. Obviously Tom Boyd was our big play, but we need to avoid the continual expensive free agent approach. I really believe that continual renewal is essential and renewal does not come unless you are adding new growth (that is the draft). The adage is draft for talent and trade for needs.

To the first point, we agree. Use free agency to bring in talent via free agency and leave Dal with lots of picks. I don't think it's mutually exclusive tough, and that's the advantage teams at the top have to bring in even more talent without parting picks. Next year if 6 players are moved, and two rookie upgrades occur a free agent would cost us effectively a 6th rounder (circa pick 90-100). That leaves Dal with 1st, 2nd & North's third rounder and a first and second round rookie draft picks. Plus a free agent that Bevo & JMac rate. I don't think holding onto pick 100 if we rate a free agent and they fit in the salary cap is a negative. On the contrary, pick 100 is an unknown quantity, but the free agent will impact right away while the window is wide open.

On the trade point, yep, however free agency allows us to keep all our draft picks (except our last spot, 90-100+) and top up on talent. Instead of trading for need, why not where available use free agency for address need and keep picks for Dal and the players we want to keep? It's worked well the last two years in getting a running outside premiership player with a beautiful kick and then (effectively) a premiership/All Australian/leading goal kicking CHF/FF. So free agency has made our list better and I think it can continue to by grabbing the right player, at the right price and keeping decent picks for Dal.

Being an advocate for free agency doesn't mean only targeting Fyffe, Dangerfield, Dusty, Buddy types. That said, if our salary cap banking is still there (I'm certain it is) that was destined for Hurley, then we should be exploring all free agent options especially when the salary cap increases. The club was obviously confident in 2016 that going ahead it could spend circa $800,000 on a player for 5 years and also continue to sign up all our kids over this 5 year period. So a bank of salary cap and free agency rules that allow us to keep high picks and get the player we want, to me seems like a good situation to be in.

[KT31]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

I agree with the renewal theme BJ. I've just finished Norm Smith's biography and the turnover of players in a team that won five premierships out of six from 1955-60 was pretty high. It's not like he had a core group of 15 players that played in every flag and he squeezed the last drop of talent. He was chopping and changing and bringing kids in each year at the cost of putting established stars' nose out of joint-blokes like Athol Webb and Don Williams left after '59 because Smith wouldn't play Webb as a full forward and Williams started as 19th man in the '59 Grand Final. Most of those years he won those five flags he was putting easily the youngest teams of all the clubs out on the field.

I prefer to see it from '54, as five from seven.

Seriously though, Smith's record of 8 Granfinals in 11 years, with a 6/2 record is just simply fer-nominal.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

BT
We are possibly in vehement agreement.

I do not want to see the club blowing cap space on expensive free agents, or trading our way out of the draft.

My thinking is that we need 3 picks each year, and if we could trade to get those in the first 2 rounds, we should remain well placed for the now and the future. We need the Sydney mindset of always challenging.

We do not want to be losing the talent we have developed unless we have already got the replacement available.

[Dry Rot]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

Something odd with our Round 2 opponents?

Papley and Rohan on the long term injury list, but only out for a dew weeks, Heeney is not on the list but will be out for longer.

Whats going on there?

http://www.afl.com.au/news/injury-list

[ledge]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

Something odd with our Round 2 opponents?

Papley and Rohan on the long term injury list, but only out for a dew weeks, Heeney is not on the list but will be out for longer.

Whats going on there?

http://www.afl.com.au/news/injury-list

Maybe you can Only have two replaced and they already claimed the two on Papley and Rohan, once one comes back they keep in which of the two they prefer to stay in to replace Heeney .

[jeemak]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

BT
We are possibly in vehement agreement.

I do not want to see the club blowing cap space on expensive free agents, or trading our way out of the draft.

My thinking is that we need 3 picks each year, and if we could trade to get those in the first 2 rounds, we should remain well placed for the now and the future. We need the Sydney mindset of always challenging.

We do not want to be losing the talent we have developed unless we have already got the replacement available.

Sure we need the Sydney mindset of always challenging, now how can we convince head office to turn a blind eye to our salary cap over a long period of time?

I have read through your respective posts, and there's not a huge difference in message - you're just getting there via different means.

My concern with free agency is over spending and hampering the management of ongoing demands of a rising playing group. We are going to see other clubs place significant contract offers on the table for all of Macrae, Stringer, Dahlhaus, JJ, Hunter, Bontempelli, Liberatore and Daniel who will all prove to be excellent to elite by the end of the season or in the very short term. In Wallis and McLean we have two more who could fit into that category not long afterwards. Salary cap increase aside, we need to manage our pennies very closely over time and where possible, extend contracts sooner rather than later.

This leads me to believe our sweet spot in free agency is going to be when good - not necessarily elite - players actually choose us as a destination club, much like Cloke has, in order to get amongst our culture and have a crack at success. I think this is probably where we can find value, and if we put in another very strong year this year we'll be one of those clubs.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

Sure we need the Sydney mindset of always challenging, now how can we convince head office to turn a blind eye to our salary cap over a long period of time?

I have read through your respective posts, and there's not a huge difference in message - you're just getting there via different means.

My concern with free agency is over spending and hampering the management of ongoing demands of a rising playing group. We are going to see other clubs place significant contract offers on the table for all of Macrae, Stringer, Dahlhaus, JJ, Hunter, Bontempelli, Liberatore and Daniel who will all prove to be excellent to elite by the end of the season or in the very short term. In Wallis and McLean we have two more who could fit into that category not long afterwards. Salary cap increase aside, we need to manage our pennies very closely over time and where possible, extend contracts sooner rather than later.

This leads me to believe our sweet spot in free agency is going to be when good - not necessarily elite - players actually choose us as a destination club, much like Cloke has, in order to get amongst our culture and have a crack at success. I think this is probably where we can find value, and if we put in another very strong year this year we'll be one of those clubs.

Correct. Say if Adams leaves and we need/want a mature KPD, free agency this year opens up options such as Trengrove, Schoenmakers, Hansen, McKenzie & Mackie, among others to inject into the team and keep our draft picks for Dal. We don't particularly need to look at mids, rucks or forwards unless someone pops up at a great price (Bruest?).

I'm not sure we'd go that hard at a Fyfe or Fyfe type, but if the club can juggle it with the cap increase and our banking, I'm happy back JMac and our number crunchers. As you say, another very good year and we should be able to look at getting a decent player while keeping our picks.

[1eyedog]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

Such is the astuteness of Dal with regards to our list requirements and game plan development and implementation by Bevo that I don't think we need to entice elite, or even very good talent. Hamling was a very speculative selection and trending at below average as an AFL player, yet he became a great role player and a premiership player.

I agree with Jeemak that on-going success brings greater opportunities for the club in terms of the free agency pool and if we can line up enough good, solid players who are interested in a strong culture and having extended opportunities at playing finals (Crameri, Cloke, Suckling etc.) we should be well-placed at the pointy end of the season. All the while of course maintaining and developing our high end draft picks.

Our priority really needs to be internally focused on our young, premiership guns. We really need to keep this group together for another 5 years.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Opposition Chatter - Season 2017

Round 1 - Collingwood missing Wells, De Goey, Elliott & Greenwood.

That's got to hurt them. A lot more pressure on Pendles (whose got a niggle) & Treloar to make the most of Grundy's likely ruck advantage around stoppages.