Makes logical sense. I expect the club is thinking the same way. I recall Hamish saying something along these lines after drafting O’Connor.And you've hit the nail on the head why I am putting so much emphasis on height. They are the exception, and positive exceptions which this is, as AFL does have a small bias towards being taller and heavier in terms of player sizes (noting how exceptional, or specialised you need to be to get onto a list at <175 cms) should always be prioritised. After all, being bigger and taller then your opponent opens the game up for you. It's easier to be a marking/intercept threat around the ground, as well as giving more room for error to prevent (and create) turnovers in handball passages. It makes it easier to win a hardball when you are cracking in because you have a longer reach as well as the extra weight, as well as to either lay a tackle or at least make some attempt to slow down an opposition player. It opens up flexibility forward and back as you could feasibly rest as another tall, in which there is less competition for in a best 22 (and you could potentially ditch carrying a tall on the bench, meaning more midfielders/runners). The good thing about all sports is these things can be overcome if you're good enough (hence why it's never properly homogenised), however every investment into someone who offers these kinds of points of difference is effectively an investment into how versatile, and resilient your side is as a whole.
Height/weights haven't been updated as Gollant is still at 72 kg, despite that puff piece where he gained 13 kg. Torpedro posted an updated amount which had Hately at 91 kg this offseason. Considering some other numbers checked out (namely Gollant), I'm inclined to trust it until proven otherwise.
But doesn’t align with reality IMO. Hawthorn and Richmond the two great teams of the last decade and neither had a midfielder taller than 187 cm. The common thread in their midfields isn’t size - it’s skill.