-
i get your point Gary , and i do think using Smith as a sub would be a wise move , i totally agree that Smith couldnt play a full game , but i do belive he could be used as that sub to bring on in 10 min busts , to one _ give English a rest , two_ keep Darcy forward and three_ keeping Lobb back , as you said last year Lobb had to play CHB and ruck in the same game which obviously detracted from his preformance, he needs to get his head around playing that backman roll like he did early when he was shifted back and did really well .So from a list managment point Smith could be the answere for 10 or 15 mins a quarter or whenever English is run off his feet and needs a rest , Smith dosnt have to star when he comes on ( it would be nice if he did but )all he has to do is complete and be physical , wear the oppostion ruckman down , for when Ehglish takes over again .
May i add that just the thought of Cox sent my head into a spin , he is definatly not what we need . -
Cox would be ok by me as a back up. I think some other clubs might grab him (Geelong).
He's not a bad player.Leave a comment:
-
Lets look at the questions originally posed rather than just the emotion of the player nominated. Forget the specific player.
As I understand it, it's more about:
Is there any value of trying to keep Darcy in the forward line more than providing a chop out in the ruck?
Is there any value of trying to keep Lobb in the back line more given last year he had a few games where he was both the CHB and the relief 2nd ruck?
Is Lachlan Smith ready to play 5 or 10 games next season as a back-up ruck?
With 23 players rather than 22 and a limited sub is there merit in carrying another ruck or a versatile type or do we just double down on another midfielder like we have typically done?
I fully agree that the player that was nominated was always going to get a sharp response, but I feel you're missing the more overall list management question that was posed.
Given the change to the sub rule, is there a potential advantage in playing a 2nd ruck or do we continue on with midfielders like we have done in the past?
For what it's worth, I don't believe Smith is ready to make a contribution in a 2nd ruck role. He has too many limitations but he is improving nicely and that should continue to be done at Footscray and at the training sessions.Leave a comment:
-
Mason Cox is still one of the best at ruck taps, and you would think that the new ruck rules to discourage wrestling will further help him. A quarter of his hitouts go to advantage.
There are plenty of negatives to his game, but if English was injured in round one I'd be okay with having Cox on the list as back up.
I liked what I saw of Lachie Smith at the end of the year, but I'm not sure how you can be so confident that he will contribute more than Cox at AFL level next year.Last edited by jazzadogs; Yesterday, 07:18 PM.Leave a comment:
-
Sorry jasper , i'll be as gentle as i can with this response about bringing in Cox , NO FU___N WAY , HIS NOT THE ANSWERE .
As doggiesftw just said Smith is the answere , his last half of the year was very good , i watched a fair bit of his games and it appeared like half way through the season the game finally made sense to Smith , he finally knew where to run when to run , when to fly for marks and when to stay down , he stared to take marks around the ground which he wasnt doing previously , he kicked goals , he beat his opponent , the game finally made sense to him , he would be with a good preseason close to senior football in my opinion , we shouldnt be looking for ruckmen when we have one staring us in the face , sorry jasper Cox is a no from me .Leave a comment:
-
Just play Smith, he’s already one of the premier ruckmen in the VFL at 19 and will leave if we push him back in the pecking order - he’s young as all **** but looks pretty ready to my eye to at least contribute. Big preseason and I’d very nearly be getting him in and freeing up English a bit.
i just don’t see how Cox would actually add any benefit on the field tbh
Leave a comment:
-
-
I'm prepared to cop a hit for this because it won't be popular
With 23 players rather than 22 and a sub are we likely to see more clubs go in with 2 ruck man?
If so, could bringing in Mason Cox for a season be worth a gamble? Yes I know he's not an impressive player but lets consider:
- The talented Lachlan Smith is not quite ready yet.
- Trading Ugle-Hagan should mean we need to keep Darcy forward as much as we can.
- We don't have to drag Lobb out of the back line as much.
- With 23 players rather than 22 and a sub could we see more clubs go into games with 2 ruck man.
I know I have nominated Mason Cox but really it could be anyone else who can ruck and play forward.
I mean it could even be Khamis.Leave a comment:
-
-
You are correct that we were surplus 1 spot.
The 3 (net) so far off the list has only created 2 spots.
We need a minimum of one more main list spot for draft night as we are required a minimum of 3.
Coffield and JJ would make that 4 spots. The others are rookies anyway.
We could still delist a rookie and redraft as a rookie.Leave a comment:
-
Whilst you are correct with 4 players out and 1 player in at this stage, we currently only have 2 open list spots because one of Sellwood/Walker was an injury replacement for Weightman, so Weightman effectively comes back onto the list again.
Should all of JJ, Poulter and Coffield be delisted that would give us 5 open spots. However if we have to upgrade JOD he will take up one of those spots leaving us with 4 open spots (unless we can add another cat B rookie as they sit outside the total list limit of 42).
Hope that makes sense.Leave a comment:
-
-
Please let me know if I have this wrong?
Ins
Budarick
Out
Ugle-Hagan (Traded), Duryea (Ret), L.Jones and Scott (Del)
On Hold
Poulter, Coffield, Johannisen, Baker*
Baker might have a contract offer.
That's 1 player coming in with 8 players potentially coming out.
If we assume Baker is staying, that give us 7 open spots
Rookies
Bramble has been on a rookie list for 2 years and can stay on for another season
O'Donnell - Has been a Cat B Rookie for 3 years and has to be promoted
McNeil - I'm not sure how long he has been a rookie but the contract thread by Axe Man says he's contract until the end of 2026
Baker - I'm not sure if he has to be promoted or not.
Poulter - He's most likely going
Sellwood - Can stay on the rookie list
Walker - Can stay on the rookie list
Did I hear correctly that all clubs can add an Indigenous rookie for next season?
Draft and other options
With all that in mind
3 players coming in via the draft
3 players via the DFA and SSP options keeping one spot open for the MSD?
I have a feeling because we placed Weightman on the LTI bench we might only have 6 spots open
Please let me know if I'm around the mark?
Leave a comment:
-
Did Bulldogs miss a trick not adding a defender in AFL trade period? They sure had a crack
Many have been left questioning why the Western Bulldogs didn’t add a gun key defender during the trade period.
Well, it’s not as though they didn’t try.
It’s a clear area of need for Luke Beveridge’s side the Dogs ultimately wasn’t able to address over the last fortnight.
But not without some swings.
They were firmly in the mix for Jack Silvagni before St Kilda pounced late on the free agent.
The Dogs then went hard after Cal Wilkie and effectively forced the Saints to renegotiate the contract of the star defender and likely their next skipper.
And it’s understood 2025 All-Australian squad member Mark Keane is another name the Dogs targeted after also holding interest in fellow Crow Jordon Butts.
Of course, Adelaide asked the question of Ryley Sanders, so you wonder if either Keane or Butts were tied into that enquiry.
Despite those attempts, nothing came to fruition in the end.
“There’s a lot going on behind the scenes, we did get into some pretty meaningful conversations with a few others,” Dogs player acquisition and strategy manager Michael Regan told AFL Trade Radio on Thursday.
“Callum (Wilkie) wasn’t the only player we approached. The reasons for why they didn’t happen are layered and multi faceted.
“But there’s also a longer term strategy in involved in both those approaches and how we’re looking at key back.
“Sometimes getting these things out hurts your ability to maybe look at them again in 12 months.”
The wording out of the Kennel all along was they were only going to move on a key back if it was a clear upgrade. Not get one for the sake of it to paper over the cracks.
But they in fact were aggressive in hunting that star defender to book-end their loaded forward line.
“Yes, we’ll explore SSP (Pre-Season Supplemental Selection Period) at some level. But we have to make sure whoever we bring in is going to make a meaningful impact for the football club,” Regan added.
“That will be the lens we look at that through and there’s a much longer term strategy at play. We may not see the fruits of that labour until next trade period or even the trade period after.
“We want to make sure we’re aggressive in looking at top-end talent.”
Steven May was another player linked to the Dogs, but there ultimately wasn’t much of a market for the Melbourne backman, who turns 34 next January, in the end.
Leek Aleer also didn’t suit their needs.
So who else was out there that’s actually attainable?
Tylar Young was the only traditional key back to move clubs during the exchange window, crossing from Richmond to West Coast.
The 192cm Jai Serong, who switched from Hawthorn to Sydney, is more of a hybrid.
The Dogs are more in need of a brute stopper to supplement interceptors Rory Lobb and James O’Donnell, so even Silvagni probably wouldn’t have addressed that.
They just weren’t able to find it. Or at least not for the right price.
Connor Budarick was the Dogs’ sole trade addition to effectively replace the retired Taylor Duryea’s old role as a small lockdown defender.
Meanwhile the club’s rocky Jamarra Ugle-Hagan marriage ended as it traded the former No. 1 pick to Gold Coast, but Buku Khamis wasn’t granted his wish to move to Carlton.
The Dogs’ key back stocks are further thinned with Liam Jones’ departure as the club look to bounce back from a brutal ninth-placed finish with 14 wins.
A quiet trade period at Whitten Oval comes ahead of a year the club will be targeting Port Adelaide superstar Zak Butters, who can become a free agent in 2026.
So preserving assets could help, particularly when you look at the steep price Charlie Curnow commanded and what Essendon was wanting for Zach Merrett.
While Butters looms large, you can also expect the Dogs to again be in the market for a key defender. But as per the plan, only if they think it will raise their ceiling.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: