List Mgmt. 2024 Mid Season Draft

[manicpie]

That’s a fair assessment. Although I’d argue our ruck stocks atm are just Cameron and Cox atm. Steene isn’t going to play until the end of the year and when he does he’s highly unlikely to be in consideration of the AFL team. Begg similar although he’s even less likely to return and sounds like he’s been put on the inactive list already.

The total number of rucks we have on the list is irrelevant what matter is that we at least have a compatible back up option on reserve.

I’d also argue the same thing for key forward as well because atm we’re relying on McStay coming back from an ACL to play a pretty physically demanding role as only thing stopping Taylor and McCartin from dominating us come finals time.

It's really hard to assess how we'll go. Everything you said makes so much sense to us but I really believe that the coaching panel is really confident that our systems and processes will see us through. We basically won the flag based on that. Pace is the difference these days. If you break though opposition structures, we believe we can win every game. The idea is to get every player on board with what we stand for and deliver and that is really hard to beat.

 

[Bianconeri]

It's really hard to assess how we'll go. Everything you said makes so much sense to us but I really believe that the coaching panel is really confident that our systems and processes will see us through. We basically won the flag based on that. Pace is the difference these days. If you break though opposition structures, we believe we can win every game. The idea is to get every player on board with what we stand for and deliver and that is really hard to beat.

We also won the flag base on having two ruckman and two key forwards and having an adequate back up player in that position.

I agree on pace, the difference is when have in in the senior side and depth who are capable of playing up. The only question mark I have on that is will we be willing to drop some of our older slower players for players with more pace or we will atleast move some of our older players out of the midsole so we can have pace around the ball. Or will our older player hold up as the year goes on and prove to be the best options come finals time?

 

[manicpie]

We also won the flag base on having two ruckman and two key forwards and having an adequate back up player in that position.

I agree on pace, the difference is when have in in the senior side and depth who are capable of playing up. The only question mark I have on that is will we be willing to drop some of our older slower players for players with more pace or we will atleast move some of our older players out of the midsole so we can have pace around the ball. Or will our older player hold up as the year goes on and prove to be the best options come finals time?

Don't worry, I completely agree that we need a back up ruck/ forward, I just have no idea if Hine has the same plan

 

[satanshoof101]

Ex-Bomber ineligible for draft, Pies welcome basketballer, ex-Giant's return blocked

Check out all the latest trade news from around the League

www.afl.com.au

Couple of mid season names in here.

 

[sr36]

That’s a fair assessment. Although I’d argue our ruck stocks atm are just Cameron and Cox atm. Steene isn’t going to play until the end of the year and when he does he’s highly unlikely to be in consideration of the AFL team. Begg similar although he’s even less likely to return and sounds like he’s been put on the inactive list already.

The total number of rucks we have on the list is irrelevant what matter is that we at least have a compatible back up option on reserve.

I’d also argue the same thing for key forward as well because atm we’re relying on McStay coming back from an ACL to play a pretty physically demanding role as only thing stopping Taylor and McCartin from dominating us come finals time.

Yeah My view is you want your list to be about 35 who can play seniors and are balanced and offer depth in terms of roles. And then about 7 speculative guys of any role. I'd put both Begg and Steene in the speculative basket. In terms of ruck depth, we haven't really got any outside the team - even if they were fit.

 

[satanshoof101]

He looks pretty solid

 

[memoryofmchale]

My partner and I went to a few pre-season training sessions and while I thought the need for big bodied mids was the way to go, my partner thought Teakle was a no-brainer. After we surprisingly took both Sully and Bytel, he was perplexed. He still banged on about it last week when Brodie went down.

I suspect Teakle was very close to being taken. I think he'd have played a few games by now if we had. I guess it's water under the bridge now, because I can't see us taking him even if he were available to us.

I’d say we took Bytel given the age of our midfield. May have been flaws with Teakle we don’t know about.

Whilst his WAFL performances have been sometimes eye catching, his latest match was nothing special.

 

[VinnieB]

My partner and I went to a few pre-season training sessions and while I thought the need for big bodied mids was the way to go, my partner thought Teakle was a no-brainer. After we surprisingly took both Sully and Bytel, he was perplexed. He still banged on about it last week when Brodie went down.

I suspect Teakle was very close to being taken. I think he'd have played a few games by now if we had. I guess it's water under the bridge now, because I can't see us taking him even if he were available to us.

With McStay recovering from a long-term injury, and Mihocek now injured, it's a huge risk to not have another big body to call on up forward. We don't know if the body crunching is catching up with Mihocek given he is now 31.

Teakle makes sense IMO. He has had AFL exposure, and recently been part of the club's environment.

 

[Apex36]

I do have queries whether we'd again go for someone we passed over in pre-season. Could have gone for him instead of bytel if they wanted to.

You mean like how we passed over Markov in the preseason? We could have gone for him if we wanted to except we chose Steene instead.

…then circumstances changed and we recruited him. Sounds like a familiar story.

 

[Jen2310]

You mean like how we passed over Markov in the preseason? We could have gone for him if we wanted to except we chose Steene instead.

…then circumstances changed and we recruited him. Sounds like a familiar story.

We did have three spots, rather than the 1 when markov trained with us.
But from what I was told by someone in the media, we overlooked him because we felt comfortable where our ruck stocks are at.

I have a feeling if we look at a ruck, it'll be elsewhere.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

We did have three spots, rather than the 1 when markov trained with us.
But from what I was told by someone in the media, we overlooked him because we felt comfortable where our ruck stocks are at.

That's clearly changed. So Teakle it is. When do we sign him up? End of May?

 

[Apex36]

We did have three spots, rather than the 1 when markov trained with us.
But from what I was told by someone in the media, we overlooked him because we felt comfortable where our ruck stocks are at.

I have a feeling if we look at a ruck, it'll be elsewhere.

So we overlooked him because we were comfortable with our ruck stocks and not necessarily because of ability. A list fit decision. And now our circumstances have changed in that regard. But you think we’d look elsewhere, despite him being one of the form rucks in the state leagues, and him being familiar with our systems.

Weird.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

But from what I was told by someone in the media, we overlooked him because we felt comfortable where our ruck stocks are at.

I have a feeling if we look at a ruck, it'll be elsewhere.

That seems like a contradiction.

 

[VinnieB]

So we overlooked him because we were comfortable with our ruck stocks and not necessarily because of ability. A list fit decision. And now our circumstances have changed in that regard. But you think we’d look elsewhere, despite him being one of the form rucks in the state leagues, and him being familiar with our systems.

Weird.

And it seems he can play key position.

 

[Jen2310]

That seems like a contradiction.

Guess it depends how much we rate him v other rucks going around the league

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Guess it depends how much we rate him v other rucks going around the league

But you’re suggesting we only overlooked him because we were comfortable with our ruck stocks… so presumably we do rate him. Otherwise we would have overlooked him because he wasn’t good enough… no?

 

[Jen2310]

But you’re suggesting we only overlooked him because we were comfortable with our ruck stocks… so presumably we do rate him. Otherwise we would have overlooked him because he wasn’t good enough… no?

Thats what I was told recently.

 

[Daicosian silk]

Tess is looking most likely imo. Fills a glaring need and at worst provides some big body backup

 

[memoryofmchale]

So we overlooked him because we were comfortable with our ruck stocks and not necessarily because of ability. A list fit decision. And now our circumstances have changed in that regard. But you think we’d look elsewhere, despite him being one of the form rucks in the state leagues, and him being familiar with our systems.

Weird.

Not really weird. Just because circumstances change does not mean we pluck Teakle because a few months ago he was training well Back then, Coates Talent League sides weren't locked in and we were trialling six blokes in an SSP window.

The situation with Markov was due to SSP soon closing and completely different. It wasn't months after. It was days.

Posters on here are reading too much into WAFL form and a few speculative media pieces. His statistics are good but as I've said before, the WAFL has a lower standard of play. The VFL is a better league, even the SANFL. His statistics actually mean less because the opposition he goes up against are of reduced quality. It's not to say WAFL doesn't produce talent but there's less quality.

During his time playing for Port Adelaide in the SANFL, he was average. I liked him enough as a player but we didn't sign him for a reason.

His real test is the SANFL representative game on May 19.

But in saying that, I'm confident we're not drafting Teakle.

 

[memoryofmchale]

I'm also confident we won't go there with Callow given he hasn't been named for the SANFL representative game.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Posters on here are reading too much into WAFL form and a few speculative media pieces. His statistics are good but as I've said before, the WAFL has a lower standard of play. The VFL is a better league, even the SANFL. His statistics actually mean less because the opposition he goes up against are of reduced quality. It's not to say WAFL doesn't produce talent but there's less quality.

During his time playing for Port Adelaide in the SANFL, he was average. I liked him enough as a player but we didn't sign him for a reason.

I don’t think they’re reading too much into Teakle’s WAFL form, they’re reading into him having trialled at the club less than 6 months ago and playing in a position we are now absolutely crying out for. His “average” form playing for Port Adelaide in the SANFL was obviously good enough to earn the trial with us, so I don’t think that analysis passes the sniff test either.

We may now have others we prefer, but I don’t see how anyone outside of our recruiting staff could be confident that Teakle is not positioned right at the front of the queue come MSD time.

 

[sr36]

That seems like a contradiction.

But a supporter isn't likely to get told that we overlooked him because he's a spud... happy with our ruck situation - but we were chasing Goldy and invited a ruck to train as SSP ...

Who knows how we rate Teakle?

It took me a while to get the Tess name that posters were calling him - I thought there must have been a famous Tess with the same surname ...so I'm a bit torn about whether we should take him - taking him will forever remind me of my slowness, but it will also give me hope that I can get there in the end.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Who knows how we rate Teakle? Well out of all the SSP eligible ruckmen in the country, he was the only one we invited to train this year. I’d say someone has a high opinion of him…

 

[sr36]

Who knows how we rate Teakle? Well out of all the SSP eligible ruckmen in the country, he was the only one we invited to train this year. I’d say someone has a high opinion of him…

Perhaps it was just tomake Tess gags and keep us happy by pretending to be interested in a tall.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Perhaps it was just tomake Tess gags and keep us happy by pretending to be interested in a tall.

Eyre’s pretty tall, so don’t hurt his feelings by suggesting Teakle was about anything more than gonad jokes.