Rumour Future of the club (Bevo, board, assistant coaches, football department)

[Al dente]

Sydney did exactly this with an earlier-than-expected bid for Harry Rowston the year earlier.

We probably did overpay for Sanders, over-estimating the value of the top end pick and/or being unrealitstically optomistic about the value of our own pick. It's also only slightly bad, not awfully bad.

In terms of pointless trades it's nowhere near as e.g. Essendon trading a pick 31 for the sake of swapping their pick 11 with Geelong's pick 10. That should come into far more criticism, which has seem to be collectively forgotten by everyone. The chance that pick 10 ends up being the better player than pick 11 is about 53%.

the thing thats going to save that draft for us and the Sanders over spend is Freijah at 45, he could be top 5 in that draft pool from what ive seen.

 

[Bald]

Did you not say that we had 2 first rounders last year and packaged them up to get Pick whatever Sanders was?

Are we in agreement? I think we paid well overs for Sanders if the cost was effectively Picks 10 + 15 last year plus Pick 6 ish this year. He is 3 players, the only mitigating factor is we get to use him 1 year before this year's pick.

My view is, the points are not the be all and end all. Don't lose sight of the actual credentials of the player, the opportunity cost of credentialed players next year. The hypothetical value that a points focused approach generates is a trap.

Let's say we end up with pick 6 this year, the summary becomes:

Pick 13 (was 10), Pick 23 (was 17), and pick 6 (from this year) for Pick 6 (Was pick 4 - Sanders) and enough points to get another first rounder in Croft.

To make it simpler, I look at it like this (and admittedly I look at the world a little more optimistically than some):

We traded this years pick and last years pick 23 for the chance to guarantee a top 4 midfielder (from their draft), in a midfield that is seriously needing young talent, and getting said midfielder playing regular football alongside a Bontempelli in his 20s, rather than one in his 30s, with the pick 13 we would have had being lost to a Croft bid.

 

[TiAn_]

The trade for pick 6 was fine.

If we stayed where we were we would have had picks 13 and 23. There was a real risk someone would bid on Croft in the 10-12 range if we’d stayed at 13. He was rated right around there. It’s also par for course that a team trades out of a high pick that is at risk of being used on a bid match, teams just won’t run that gauntlet (other than GWS, who paid the price for it with Rowston).

If you take the view that matching with 13 was a likely outcome, then essentially trading 23 and F1 for 6 makes sense.

If our pick this year ends up as pick 6, then we’ve potentially overpaid by giving up 23. It will really depend on Sanders v the players available this year. If the club thought Sanders has the potential to be an elite, midfield leading mid (or that Watson could be a generational small forward - although in hindsight I suspect Sanders was always our target), then I understand why they did it.

 

[Dazb86]

I don't mind the Sanders situation. We got 2 first round players for 2 first round picks.

We probably didnt think we'd be this shit however

 

[bresker]

At the start of each preseason you get a shot of optimism, hopefulness trumps the lingering doubts , but where did everyone realistically see as at this stage ?

I went in expecting us to be average , but we really needed one or two more wins on the board at this stage . But then , what for ? To give us false hope ? Keep our coach in a job ? Linger at edge of the right?

What does win /loss ratio even mean any more ? Do we need some sort of Bolton or Neeld-like 150 point drubbing to move things along ? In fairness to Bev he’s too good for that . As are the players .

And so we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.

 

[glenashley]

She is now running with the evolution phase same as Beveridge.

When asked if he will see out his contract she waffled with a lot of words without answering that.

Here's where I call it the BS about evolution phase.

Our trading, drafting and coaching renewals clearly indicated that we were up for a tilt this year.

Not a chance anyone at the dogs truly thinks bottom 4 is 'on track'.

And not a chance the Sanders trade gets done either unless you think you're gonna be top 8 in 2024.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Did you not say that we had 2 first rounders last year and packaged them up to get Pick whatever Sanders was?

Are we in agreement? I think we paid well overs for Sanders if the cost was effectively Picks 10 + 15 last year plus Pick 6 ish this year. He is 3 players, the only mitigating factor is we get to use him 1 year before this year's pick.

My view is, the points are not the be all and end all. Don't lose sight of the actual credentials of the player, the opportunity cost of credentialed players next year. The hypothetical value that a points focused approach generates is a trap.

The point I'm trying to make is that a guaranteed pick 6 is better than an average first rounder. We can't throw around terms like "first rounder" without giving them more scrutiny - there are first rounders, and first rounders.

 

[Doggies_13]

Here's where I call it the BS about evolution phase.

Our trading, drafting and coaching renewals clearly indicated that we were up for a tilt this year.

Not a chance anyone at the dogs truly thinks bottom 4 is 'on track'.

Completely agree, every off season move and every piece of messaging pre-round 1 was that we were in the window and expected to compete this year.

1 round in the coach changed, the messaging, now 8 rounds in the executive are changing the messaging.

We may well not be good enough, I don’t believe we are as bad as current form but I also don’t think we are with the top 6.

But heads have to roll based on misjudging where we were at last year, whoever conducted and signed off on the review and the coaching which has us underperforming is so many facets of the game.

 

[Bonty4]

"Just send Naughton back and sack Bevo and we will win the Premiership"

Ead

 

[MaxiBont]

The only thing wrong with the Sanders deal is that the board felt confident keeping Bevo even with our first this year gone.

2 years of steady decline and they trusted him when we needed to be good.

Unambitious and clueless.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Here's where I call it the BS about evolution phase.

Our trading, drafting and coaching renewals clearly indicated that we were up for a tilt this year.

Not a chance anyone at the dogs truly thinks bottom 4 is 'on track'.

There's a difference to a sincere belief that we're one of the best teams in the league (that we didn't surely hold that sincere belief), rather than a general avoidance of bottoming out.

I think it's entirely fair to try to avoid the "we have to get worse before we get better" because it's never a fait accompli that the better ever comes - just ask North. So to make "trading, drafting and coaching renewals" to try and win as many games as we can this year without a heap of worry about the years into the future doesn't necessarily mean that we thought we were better than we were.

 

[Libbaaaa]

Unfortunately the media will jump all over the 'trading out future first' without viewing in the context of our father-son match.

Also Nick Watson is a dead set midget, will be shocked if he becomes anything other than a 5-10 minute burst guy.

 

[Next Waiting]

The thing about Sanders is he doesn't appear to be quick. That would mitigate things a little. He isn't so it doesn't.

To be clear, he needed to be everything he is purported to be  and quick to justify the reach in my view.

 

[yebach]

As much as I've wanted Bevo gone for years. I believe the best course of action is to keep him till the end of the season.
But in the meantime I'd be searching far and wide for his replacement.

But all this is moot, Darcy loves Bevo. Bains loves Bevo. They also go with the old " he's our most successful coach/premiership coach" lines whenever Bevo's coaching gets questioned.

 

[Next Waiting]

As much as I've wanted Bevo gone for years. I believe the best course of action is to keep him till the end of the season.
But in the meantime I'd be searching far and wide for his replacement.

But all this is moot, Darcy loves Bevo. Bains loves Bevo. They also go with the old " he's our most successful coach/premiership coach" lines whenever Bevo's coaching gets questioned.

TBF to Bevo, he is negotiating a mine field of list imbalance and the accumulated effect of poor list management decisions and under performing players.

I'm not averse to him moving on at season's end as the the length of his tenure is also a factor. I think he knows it and will do his best to bring clarity to the way forward in the interim, before bowing out this year. Exposing some players for managed periods of time (Buss, Freijah, Darcy and Sanders) while exiting others. That will be a win.

I thinking he's handling it well enough. If you believe that we should be doing much better than we are, all things considered, you're going to be disappointed.

 

[Anja_Nees]

Not sure it's zero responsibility, it's just measured. There is responsibility, but it's based on set and agreed metrics and accountability, not death by lynching. We don't know what those metrics are, and we won't, because otherwise you end up in Malcolm Turnbull 30 opinion poll losses territory.

This is often what I come back to. The club knows a lot more than we do, and might be aware of some mitigating circumstances we aren’t. I seriously hope that’s the case.

Whatever we’ve done though hasn’t really yielded improvement.

You only get to survive so many games like this weekend. Having made list changes, coaching changes and given Bevo a break it would look reactive to sack him after 8 games but it’s not looking good at all.

 

[Anja_Nees]

TBF to Bevo, he is negotiating a mine field of list imbalance and the accumulated effect of poor list management decisions and under performing players.

I'm not averse to him moving on at season's end as the the length of his tenure is also a factor. I think he knows it and will do his best to bring clarity to the way forward in the interim, before bowing out this year. Exposing some players for managed periods of time (Buss, Freijah, Darcy and Sanders) while exiting others. That will be a win.

I thinking he's handling it well enough. If you believe that we should be doing much better than we are, all things considered, you're going to be disappointed.

One thing that annoys me is that from the outside it’s hard to know whose responsibility is what.

Who, for example, has been making the calls to recruit fringe players. Is it Bevo, Power, Grant, some combination?

The list has problems that have been building for a while. Is that Power’s doing or is he following orders?

 

[CarnTheScray]

I’ve always been annoyed at our preference to bring in delisted player after delisted player and giving VFL players with no standout attributes many opportunities. So many role players that have gone to other teams in the trade person for second and third rounders, yet we go use ours on Rory Lobb

7

Rory Lobb

Age

31

Ht

207cm

Wt

106kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.0

3star

K

6.7

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.4

4star

G

0.9

4star

D

11.3

3star

K

8.0

3star

HB

3.3

2star

M

4.6

4star

T

1.4

2star

G

1.0

4star

D

7.0

2star

K

4.0

2star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.6

3star

. We did bring a few in of course, even though 80% of them were moneyball bargain bin trades that we somehow conjured up like Bruce for a third or fourth rounder or whatever it was.

We have never been keen to part with a first round pick either until this season. If you want to trade in an A grade player you need to offer something up. Do people think Steven May

1

Steven May

Age

32

Ht

193cm

Wt

101kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.7

4star

K

10.5

4star

HB

4.2

3star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.5

3star

MG

307.3

4star

D

15.5

4star

K

12.1

5star

HB

3.4

2star

M

3.4

3star

T

0.5

1star

MG

378.4

5star

D

12.4

4star

K

8.8

4star

HB

3.6

3star

M

3.2

4star

T

1.8

4star

went to Melbourne for a fourth rounder? Not saying there has been an opportunity in recent years for something like that, but pre covid there were definitely some chances.

I get our hands have been tied with JUH and Darc, but picks can always be gained through other means I.e. being bit more ruthless with list management in general, could’ve gotten something for English 1-2 seasons ago, better run clubs would’ve known he isn’t up to it when the chips are down since 2020. Other examples of course but I don’t want to write a 3000 word essay.

 

[TiAn_]

The thing about Sanders is he doesn't appear to be quick. That would mitigate things a little. He isn't so it doesn't.

To be clear, he needed to be everything he is purported to be  and quick to justify the reach in my view.

That was my knock on him at the time. But if he’s absolutely elite in every other sense that’ll justify it.

 

[Next Waiting]

One thing that annoys me is that from the outside it’s hard to know whose responsibility is what.

Who, for example, has been making the calls to recruit fringe players. Is it Bevo, Power, Grant, some combination?

The list has problems that have been building for a while. Is that Power’s doing or is he following orders?

We'll have to wait for the book to find out....

 

[Anja_Nees]

We'll have to wait for the book to find out....

Or we could ask notorious newsbreaker Sam Draper.

 

[Anja_Nees]

I’ve always been annoyed at our preference to bring in delisted player after delisted player and giving VFL players with no standout attributes many opportunities. So many role players that have gone to other teams in the trade person for second and third rounders, yet we go use ours on Rory Lobb. We did bring a few in of course, even though 80% of them were moneyball bargain bin trades that we somehow conjured up like Bruce for a third or fourth rounder or whatever it was.

We have never been keen to part with a first round pick either until this season. If you want to trade in an A grade player you need to offer something up. Do people think Steven May went to Melbourne for a fourth rounder? Not saying there has been an opportunity in recent years for something like that, but pre covid there were definitely some chances.

I get our hands have been tied with JUH and Darc, but picks can always be gained through other means I.e. being bit more ruthless with list management in general, could’ve gotten something for English 1-2 seasons ago, better run clubs would’ve known he isn’t up to it when the chips are down since 2020. Other examples of course but I don’t want to write a 3000 word essay.

After Hawthorn won in ‘08 they clearly made it their priority to get quality talent in every year to fill their gaps, and they basically surrendered their first rounder (and often more) every year for about six years to build the later premiership sides.

We seemed to make the call our first rounder was paramount and tried to get solid players with picks in the 20s and 30s or as free agents.

There’s nothing wrong with Treloar, Keath, Crozier, Bruce etc. Keath aside though I don’t think many of them really addressed a glaring need. They were just pretty good players.

We supplemented that with fringe players.

I really do wonder whether we should have gone all out trading our draft hand (except the Darcy/JUH years). Tried to get an A-Grade ruck in instead of Stef Martin etc.

 

[Dazb86]

After Hawthorn won in ‘08 they clearly made it their priority to get quality talent in every year to fill their gaps, and they basically surrendered their first rounder (and often more) every year for about six years to build the later premiership sides.

We seemed to make the call our first rounder was paramount and tried to get solid players with picks in the 20s and 30s or as free agents.

There’s nothing wrong with Treloar, Keath, Crozier, Bruce etc. Keath aside though I don’t think many of them really addressed a glaring need. They were just pretty good players.

We supplemented that with fringe players.

I really do wonder whether we should have gone all out trading our draft hand (except the Darcy/JUH years). Tried to get an A-Grade ruck in instead of Stef Martin etc.

I feel like Lobb has been the only clear bust tbh. It didn't make sense at the time and it's only looking worse as time goes on.

 

[Next Waiting]

I feel like Lobb has been the only clear bust tbh. It didn't make sense at the time and it's only looking worse as time goes on.

Unless Darcy couldn't play much last year or one of English or Darcy get injured this year. I don't think it was a bad idea. The cost can be argued.

He may even have trade value at the end of this year.

I think we've made a lot worse decisions.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I get our hands have been tied with JUH and Darc, but picks can always be gained through other means I.e. being bit more ruthless with list management in general, could’ve gotten something for English 1-2 seasons ago, better run clubs would’ve known he isn’t up to it when the chips are down since 2020. Other examples of course but I don’t want to write a 3000 word essay.

Little bit of hindsight hero here though. No reason to think, for example, that given the targeted recruitment of Keath and Bruce and the good form they both showed in 2021, that they would be of completely zero value to winning games by 2023-24. Bruce is about to turn 32. Keath 32 (and can be argued is younger in football terms given his cricket years, less accumulated wear on the body). May is also 32, and basically the same age as Keath, yet is playing as well now as he was in 2021.

Do people think Steven May went to Melbourne for a fourth rounder? Not saying there has been an opportunity in recent years for something like that, but pre covid there were definitely some chances.