Delisted #28: Mitch Brown - Retired - 20/9/22

[Kakkle]

Dodoro was obviously playing two strategies in the draft - looking for solid replacements in the advent of a suspension and good depth in case CAS threw out the appeal.

Prior to the trade/draft period last year we had 6 blokes over 25 that weren't in danger of being suspended (or 9 blokes over 22). That includes Dempsey, who was already suspended for three rounds (and depending on reports, worst case scenario was meant to be four-week suspensions). It's not like recruiting mature age players was going to skew the age profile of our list.

And obviously we weren't expecting them to be out for nine months, but if you're looking at ensuring you have solid depth for that scenario you don't draft 18 year old kids in the 50s or 60s and expect them to be available to play Round 1 the following year.

Hartley and Brown were not drafted on the provision that the players could be suspended.

 

[Lore]

Hartley and Brown were not drafted on the provision that the players could be suspended.

Well it seems like a pretty likely explanation to me, unless you think all four of Hooker, Hurley, Hartley and Brown are best 22 without suspensions? If you have an alternate theory, this would be your cue for explaining it.

 

[Kakkle]

I don't have a ''alternate theory''.

Hartley and Brown were drafted on their own merit, not because the players could potentially be suspended. This is a complete and utter non-fact when Dodo and co made the decision.

 

[Zach Package]

Well it seems like a pretty likely explanation to me, unless you think all four of Hooker, Hurley, Hartley and Brown are best 22 without suspensions? If you have an alternate theory, this would be your cue for explaining it.

Depth, we were probably 4 key position players on the list short last year, these selections were warranted even if we didn't have suspensions.

We probably needed another one too, if we had snagged Adams as well Brown wouldn't have to be fossicking around in the backline.

 

[yaco55]

Kakkle is 100% correct. Why did we select Michael,Grimley,Grim and Jamar if Brown and Hartley were cover for suspended players

 

[efcboy]

Kakkle is 100% correct. Why did we select Michael,Grimley,Grim and Jamar if Brown and Hartley were cover for suspended players

Whilst I don't disagree it could be argued the club needed cover for the original cover

 

[Lance Uppercut]

I'd've preferred Essendon drafting a younger player TBH.

but we did draft young players...

 

[carnthedons]

but we did draft young players...

wouldn't you have preferred an 18yo michael still to mitch brown?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

wouldn't you have preferred an 18yo michael still to mitch brown?

yep, it's always better to be young than good

 

[DapperJong]

We picked the best talls at out position in the draft I thought. We were well short. That was obvious.

 

[RedmanWasHere]

but we did draft young players...

Except for Brown and Hartley.

I'd've also liked Essendon to draft a couple of non skinny ruckmen like Kovacevic (204cm 111kgs) and Parella (203cm and 104kgs) instead of Nyuon and having Jamar as one of the top-ups as well as swapping Morgan and Redman for Mathieson and say Balic.

Maybe I'm too picky.
Maybe I'm hard to please.
Maybe I just want naturally big draftees rather than skinny ones.

I just want all of Essendon's draftees each year to play at least 5 AFL games in their first year.

 

[carnthedons]

Except for Brown and Hartley.

I'd've also liked Essendon to draft a couple of non skinny ruckmen like Kovacevic (204cm 111kgs) and Parella (203cm and 104kgs) instead of Nyuon and having Jamar as one of the top-ups as well as swapping Morgan and Redman for Mathieson and say Balic.

Maybe I'm too picky.
Maybe I'm hard to please.
Maybe I just want naturally big draftees rather than skinny ones.

I just want all of Essendon's draftees each year to play at least 5 AFL games in their first year.

That's a recipe for being s**t and accepting you will continue to be isn't it?

Here random pick 70 plodder, we're a top 4 team but you need to get your 5 games in. Seriously?

Who would you rather have picked in place of Brown & Hartley? Even with the ability of hindsight, pick 2 guys after them in the draft who'd get 5 games at a half decent team which pre-suspensions we might've been. Who are they?

 

[RedmanWasHere]

That's a recipe for being s**t and accepting you will continue to be isn't it?

Here random pick 70 plodder, we're a top 4 team but you need to get your 5 games in. Seriously?

Who would you rather have picked in place of Brown & Hartley? Even with the ability of hindsight, pick 2 guys after them in the draft who'd get 5 games at a half decent team which pre-suspensions we might've been. Who are they?

I'd've drafted Angus Milham from Essendon's VFL side if he wasn't skinny but, if the rule on talls was they had to be 22+, I'd've gone for Sam Tagliabue and one of Coburg's Tom Goodwin or Box Hill's Peter McEvoy.
I'd've also considered Lech Featherstone and Sam Baulderstone.

I assumed Essendon drafted who they drafted without the suspensions possibly happening.

 

[carnthedons]

I'd've drafted Angus Milham from Essendon's VFL side if he wasn't skinny but, if the rule on talls was they had to be 22+, I'd've gone for Sam Tagliabue and one of Coburg's Tom Goodwin or Box Hill's Peter McEvoy.
I'd've also considered Lech Featherstone and Sam Baulderstone.

I assumed Essendon drafted who they drafted without the suspensions possibly happening.

So basically a whole bunch of backup s**t trucks? Thought so.

Which half decent team would give any of those players 5 games barring catastrophic injuries to one part of their list?

 

[BrunoV]

Well it seems like a pretty likely explanation to me, unless you think all four of Hooker, Hurley, Hartley and Brown are best 22 without suspensions? If you have an alternate theory, this would be your cue for explaining it.

We've had no spine in our vfl teams for the last two years. Our starting 22 was very solid for key position players but there was no depth on the list (especially when two of the spots are taken by pears and strinberg who are barely afl standard key defenders).

There was an immediate need for some depth that could perform at afl level straight away (because we had not replaced the kpps we lost).

Now we're at the point where we need the next gen kpps (who will probably take 3 to 5 years to develop).

 

[Doss]

I'd've drafted Angus Milham from Essendon's VFL side if he wasn't skinny but, if the rule on talls was they had to be 22+, I'd've gone for Sam Tagliabue and one of Coburg's Tom Goodwin or Box Hill's Peter McEvoy.
I'd've also considered Lech Featherstone and Sam Baulderstone.

Neither Milham or Tagliabue are AFL standard.

 

[Kakkle]

Except for Brown and Hartley.

I'd've also liked Essendon to draft a couple of non skinny ruckmen like Kovacevic (204cm 111kgs) and Parella (203cm and 104kgs) instead of Nyuon and having Jamar as one of the top-ups as well as swapping Morgan and Redman for Mathieson and say Balic.

Maybe I'm too picky.
Maybe I'm hard to please.
Maybe I just want naturally big draftees rather than skinny ones.

I just want all of Essendon's draftees each year to play at least 5 AFL games in their first year.

Neither Milham or Tagliabue are AFL standard.

Yeah but they are big!!!!

 

[Beerfish]

Maybe I'm too picky.
Maybe I'm hard to please.
Maybe I just want naturally big draftees rather than skinny ones.

Is this what it sounds like when doves cry?

 

[boncer34]

I'd've drafted Angus Milham from Essendon's VFL side if he wasn't skinny but, if the rule on talls was they had to be 22+, I'd've gone for Sam Tagliabue and one of Coburg's Tom Goodwin or Box Hill's Peter McEvoy.
I'd've also considered Lech Featherstone and Sam Baulderstone.

I assumed Essendon drafted who they drafted without the suspensions possibly happening.

Lol.

Petes a great bloke but he's nowhere near AFL.

 

[BrunoV]

I'd've drafted Angus Milham from Essendon's VFL side if he wasn't skinny but, if the rule on talls was they had to be 22+, I'd've gone for Sam Tagliabue and one of Coburg's Tom Goodwin or Box Hill's Peter McEvoy.
I'd've also considered Lech Featherstone and Sam Baulderstone.

I assumed Essendon drafted who they drafted without the suspensions possibly happening.

I don't really understand what you're getting at.

For a start, if you're getting 5 games out of 18 to 21 year old ruckmen you're dealing with prodigies (the likes of which we see a few times a decade) or an injury crisis.

When you are looking at the key posts and ruck spots there should be a few generations on the list. At least 2 rucks should be ready made AFL standard, with a third being capable and a long term project. We had Leuenberger, Bellchambers and McKernan at the point at which Nyuon was drafted. Granted that McKernan is outgunned as a tap ruckmen but his work around the ground is excellent and he has proven himself to be adequate fodder (even if he is a coach's favourite player to inexplicably leave out of a side).

Nyuon has all of the tools that could see the finished product end up as one of the elite rucks in the competition. From reports he was clearly the best junior ruck (he was All-Australian), we know he has ridiculous athleticism and I reckon he is now well over 2 meters (comparing him to Jamar and Michael on the weekend). There is nothing you have referred to, or that I am aware of, that comes close to the prospect of a fully developed Nyuon (granted, again, that you can't assume that he will develop as expected - but it's all speculation so we might as well have the kid that has the most to work with).

I agree that there is something about Milham, he moves well and knows his way around the field, but on the last sighting he was significantly further away than Nyuon (at 210cm it looks to me that he needs about 20kgs which is not necessarily something he can carry as he does not have a Sandilands or Witts build). He is painfully thin and clearly being kept on our reserves list because we see something there in the really long term. That's about it as far as equal psychical prospects are concerned- you'd need to look overseas or at another sport.

Once we lost our suspended players we brought in experienced cover (Jamar) and a younger bull who throws his weight around and has better than average mobility for a player of his size (Michael).


It's much the same story with the key position players. There is no doubt that there should always be few projects on the list but it would have been "putting the cart before the horse" for EFC to go for the long term projects when, following the un-replaced losses of Jenkins, Gumbleton, Ryder and Carlisle and the stalling of the careers of Pears and Steinberg, we hardly had the key posts filled in best 22 (Hooker, Hurley and Daniher were the only certainties before the suspensions). There was an immediate need to add depth and I am not aware that there was anything that resembles competition for best available KPP at the positions at which Brown and Hartley were taken.

Hartley was 22, 199cm, with better mobility than Hooker (to put it into perspective - not to say that he is half the player), elite disposal and comfortably the best key defender in the VFL. He was as much a project for the long term as he was depth.

 

[ezard15]

yes

 

[Howard Moon]

Well it seems like a pretty likely explanation to me, unless you think all four of Hooker, Hurley, Hartley and Brown are best 22 without suspensions? If you have an alternate theory, this would be your cue for explaining it.

In the space of not long we lost all of Ryder, Gumby, Carslile, Crameri and probably another one or two im forgetting. We were at bare bones for kpp depth, so much so Hooker our best defender was a fwd. These picks along with Francis were the beginning redressing that i thought..

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Well it seems like a pretty likely explanation to me, unless you think all four of Hooker, Hurley, Hartley and Brown are best 22 without suspensions? If you have an alternate theory, this would be your cue for explaining it.

Hurley
Hooker
Bellchambers
Daniher
McKernan

Pears, Ambrose

And that was it. Ready-to-go talls were already a necessity. Arguably, you could play all three of Hurley, Hooker and Hartley back, and all three of Daniher, Brown and McKernan forward. It's a tall team but not outside the realms of possibility.

 

[Doss]

If anything Brown and Hartley were more about covering the loss of Carlisle (and I suppose, Steinberg even).

 

[Howard Moon]

Bigger question would be, would we have delisted Browne kav Stein dal and co of we knew about suspensions