Opinion Collingwood Almanac 2016

[Knightmare]

Henderson is an interesting one. He is 28 and having a career best season, the first time he has averaged over 20 disposals in his career. He is a decent rebounder with his foot skills the big weapon. But would we be hitting him on the downward curve? He is an unrestricted free agent, so getting him cheap is the real appeal in a year we have little in terms of trade currency. We do lack defenders who can kick, even though we have a heap of defenders on the list. Is he much of an upgrade on a guy like Langdon though?

It is interesting going through the options and assessing who would be part of the back six, if an addition was made.

I'd be looking from a slightly different viewpoint with a view to expand the back six into a back seven of: Reid, Brown, Williams, Howe, Henderson, Langdon and Scharenberg to play weekly as best 22 players.

With that group of seven it would mean some times on the bench and that whole group or the majority of that group learning to play a second position, which overall in each case I view other than with Brown as achievable.

Williams with his ground ball winning ability I'd love to see pinch-hit on the ball. He can also play forward well.

Scharenberg can push forward and take marks and may also in time learn to play some midfield. Langdon may be similar to Scharenberg in practical usage.

Howe can obviously swing forward and could probably push up onto a wing if we wanted him to.

Maynard can play some forward and if he improves his endurance he could push onto the ball as with Williams.

So I'm not overall so set on just limiting that backline to a set back six.

Hey Knightmare I love your work, out of curiosity how many hours do you spend watching footy during the week?

By the way I still think the Cats will win the Premieship this year who is your pick at this point?

Around 10 hours each week on average over a season (between all levels of play). That might mean 1-2 junior games most weekends on average (highly variable though - sometimes up to four in one weeks, other weekends if games are in the country and hard to get to I'll just stick to AFL/state league matches).

AFL talent scouts have hard, often catching four games in a day. So they'd be getting in double the volume of games each weekend relative to what I'd consume if they're also watching some night AFL games or replays of any AFL games to go with all those junior matches.

--
As for this years premiership, it's anyone's game with those top five sides (Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney, Adelaide and GWS) those only realistic chances. I'm back and fourth as to whether I favour Hawthorn or Geelong, but with the MCG advantage I favour those sides over the interstate teams.

My theory is the best, healthy team generally wins. Both Hawthorn and Geelong have injury lists that project going into finals to be lean, so if one or the other gets several key injuries heading into the finals or early in the finals, I'll be tipping the other way.

Ask me today, Hawthorn win, having the better formline. They're a very beatable and vulnerable team, lacking key position strength at both ends, but they're just so clutch (winning games when it is there to be won and having their good players lift in those moments).

Just being overprotective of those four consecutive premierships from 1927-1930, and not wanting Hawthorn to come any closer to Collingwood's 15 premierships, I'm supporting whoever Hawthorn face with those other premiership contenders behind Hawthorn on total premierships won.

 

[CFC2010]

My admiration for the Hawks on our board is obvious and despised all the same.

I still think the Cats are the only team that have their measure.

I'll be honest the team we lost to in 2011 winning in 2016 will hurt me more than the Hawks breaking a record that I never lived through.
Just my opinion.

By the way keep up the good work it is appreciated.

 

[Quicky]

It is interesting going through the options and assessing who would be part of the back six, if an addition was made.

I'd be looking from a slightly different viewpoint with a view to expand the back six into a back seven of: Reid, Brown, Williams, Howe, Henderson, Langdon and Scharenberg to play weekly as best 22 players.

With that group of seven it would mean some times on the bench and that whole group or the majority of that group learning to play a second position, which overall in each case I view other than with Brown as achievable.

Williams with his ground ball winning ability I'd love to see pinch-hit on the ball. He can also play forward well.

Scharenberg can push forward and take marks and may also in time learn to play some midfield. Langdon may be similar to Scharenberg in practical usage.

Howe can obviously swing forward and could probably push up onto a wing if we wanted him to.

Maynard can play some forward and if he improves his endurance he could push onto the ball as with Williams.

So I'm not overall so set on just limiting that backline to a set back six.



Around 10 hours each week on average over a season (between all levels of play). That might mean 1-2 junior games most weekends on average (highly variable though - sometimes up to four in one weeks, other weekends if games are in the country and hard to get to I'll just stick to AFL/state league matches).

AFL talent scouts have hard, often catching four games in a day. So they'd be getting in double the volume of games each weekend relative to what I'd consume if they're also watching some night AFL games or replays of any AFL games to go with all those junior matches.

--
As for this years premiership, it's anyone's game with those top five sides (Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney, Adelaide and GWS) those only realistic chances. I'm back and fourth as to whether I favour Hawthorn or Geelong, but with the MCG advantage I favour those sides over the interstate teams.

My theory is the best, healthy team generally wins. Both Hawthorn and Geelong have injury lists that project going into finals to be lean, so if one or the other gets several key injuries heading into the finals or early in the finals, I'll be tipping the other way.

Ask me today, Hawthorn win, having the better formline. They're a very beatable and vulnerable team, lacking key position strength at both ends, but they're just so clutch (winning games when it is there to be won and having their good players lift in those moments).

Just being overprotective of those four consecutive premierships from 1927-1930, and not wanting Hawthorn to come any closer to Collingwood's 15 premierships, I'm supporting whoever Hawthorn face with those other premiership contenders behind Hawthorn on total premierships won.

I agree you should think of the defensive mix as more than a fixed back six. You need flexibility certainly. But it still equates to a mix of guys that can take the defensive match ups. To me that tends to be two key defenders, two medium defenders, two small defenders and another couple who can play in different roles (depending on match ups).

I look at the seven you named and think, who plays a shut down role on the crumbers? There's no options there that you listed.

To that end, I see our starting defensive group roughly like this (its hard to pick):

Reid, Brown, Langdon, Howe, Sinclair, Ramsay (Scharenberg, Adams).

I like that group because of the ball use, but outside those guys ball use is an issue. Which is why Henderson is intriguing. But who does he surplant? Given Sinclair, Ramsay and Scharenberg are often injured I think he'd get plenty of game time as a quality ball using half back for us. Especially when the other competition for his spot, Maynard and Williams are better suited to back pocket.

 

[Quicky]

When you think that Henderson as an unrestricted free agent only costs whatever the contract is to the salary cap; and that he likely replaces a guy like Toovey on the playing list, it seems a smart move to improve the overall quality on the list.

 

[Knightmare]

I agree you should think of the defensive mix as more than a fixed back six. You need flexibility certainly. But it still equates to a mix of guys that can take the defensive match ups. To me that tends to be two key defenders, two medium defenders, two small defenders and another couple who can play in different roles (depending on match ups).

I look at the seven you named and think, who plays a shut down role on the crumbers? There's no options there that you listed.

To that end, I see our starting defensive group roughly like this (its hard to pick):

Reid, Brown, Langdon, Howe, Sinclair, Ramsay (Scharenberg, Adams).

I like that group because of the ball use, but outside those guys ball use is an issue. Which is why Henderson is intriguing. But who does he surplant? Given Sinclair, Ramsay and Scharenberg are often injured I think he'd get plenty of game time as a quality ball using half back for us. Especially when the other competition for his spot, Maynard and Williams are better suited to back pocket.

That's a key question in talking about who covers crumbers. My default answer is Williams. He has the speed, agility and power at ground level. Isn't a ball user, so having him focus more on beating his man in the contest is more his go and can allow others to use it more and more quickly out of the back half. He'll offer his run here and there after winning the ball, but ultimately I'd focus him more on being that role player/stopper first type.

As you rightly covered, injuries happen and happen often down back. Scharenberg with his knees. Sinclair with concussion etc. So injury coverage seems necessary, and will see even outside that group Maynard, Ramsay, Sinclair etc coming in. Adams can also rotate back. Varcoe, Sidebottom etc same if required.

Henderson for me is that last piece in the back half to give that missing offense. We have the stoppers (small - Williams, tall - Brown) and intercepters (Langdon, Scharenberg, Howe, Reid). So having Henderson for that proper kicking ability from the back half I feel is that right compliment to what we have.

Ramsay, Maynard, Sinclair all can play that role deeper on opposition smalls. So the coverage is easily there - even assuming Toovey and Goldsack are moved on at seasons end.

When you think that Henderson as an unrestricted free agent only costs whatever the contract is to the salary cap; and that he likely replaces a guy like Toovey on the playing list, it seems a smart move to improve the overall quality on the list.

That's how I see it. Henderson isn't entrenched in Adelaide's best 22 and hasn't been in there until this past month really.

Without that first round pick to offer, free agency is the solution. Henderson won't be super pricey. From Victoria. If we approach him and make it clear our vision and our deficiency down back and express how he perfectly can fill that list need, he is very realistic and gettable the way I'm looking at it with him.

 

[Knightmare]

My admiration for the Hawks on our board is obvious and despised all the same.

I still think the Cats are the only team that have their measure.

I'll be honest the team we lost to in 2011 winning in 2016 will hurt me more than the Hawks breaking a record that I never lived through.
Just my opinion.

By the way keep up the good work it is appreciated.

An interesting question would be Geelong 2007-2016 v Hawthorn 2007-2016.

Ridiculous super-teams could be formed from those two sides.

I view Geelong at their peak (with Ablett etc) under Mark Thompson the better team of the two.

But Hawthorn winning all those flags and maintaining. It's incredible.

It seems only just given their respective dominance these past ten years that they face off against one another in the grand final.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

An interesting question would be Geelong 2007-2016 v Hawthorn 2007-2016.

Ridiculous super-teams could be formed from those two sides.

I view Geelong at their peak (with Ablett etc) under Mark Thompson the better team of the two.

But Hawthorn winning all those flags and maintaining. It's incredible.

It seems only just given their respective dominance these past ten years that they face off against one another in the grand final.

I'd rather hawthorn butcher themselves in the prelim. That way GF will be painless.
Enough of hawthorn winning - time for others

 

[Prochard123]

Hey KM,
Do you see any way for us to get Hurley?

Cheers

 

[ThePhantom777]

So basically Henderson replaces Heath Shaw?

 

[TradeDraft]

Knightmare has your Rating of Aish Changed from his last 3 Games?

 

[Prochard123]

Knightmare has your Rating of Aish Changed from his last 3 Games?

Hi Dave, it appears that you look exactly the way I've always pictured you to be In a good way

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

An interesting question would be Geelong 2007-2016 v Hawthorn 2007-2016.

Ridiculous super-teams could be formed from those two sides.

I view Geelong at their peak (with Ablett etc) under Mark Thompson the better team of the two.

But Hawthorn winning all those flags and maintaining. It's incredible.

It seems only just given their respective dominance these past ten years that they face off against one another in the grand final.

So much for all the AFLs effort on equalisation!

 

[Knightmare]

Hey KM,
Do you see any way for us to get Hurley?

Cheers

Likely goes to WBD, with Cloke also rumoured to be joining him.

To realistically get Hurley it would take a Beams level trade.

Given the club don't have the picks, it would be in the form of players that Collingwood would produce the pieces to appeal to Essendon.

An eg trade could be:
One general defender: Tom Langdon or Matthew Scharenberg or Jackson Ramsay or Brayden Maynard or Ben Sinclair
One key defender: Jack Frost or Nathan Brown or Jonathon Marsh
One midfielder/forward: Tim Broomhead or Jack Crisp or Levi Greenwood or Jarryd Blair
for Michael Hurley

With clubs able to switch picks as necessary in order to reach an agreement on the correct value.

In a deal for Hurley I'd look to trade out players who are expendable and not top 16 on list standard players (with Langdon a potential exception here if Ricky Henderson can be had as a free agent). That way while several good players are walking out the door, it wouldn't impact winning in a way where the trade would send the club backwards.

So basically Henderson replaces Heath Shaw?

In some respects. He would also be there as Shaw was to provide rebound, but in a different way as more a kicker than a runner. Henderson isn't the same 1v1 stopper, nor the interceptor, not that anyone really is with Shaw's rebounding capabilities.

Half back, back pocket and pushing up to a wing through. I'm liking his recent form and feel he has finally reached a level in his play to justify a best 22 position.

Knightmare has your Rating of Aish Changed from his last 3 Games?

Aish is on the improve and has been good in recent weeks. Gaining confidence and getting better game to game.

Starting to show some signs aerially and also showing some smarts in close.

He still has a way to go. But being on the improve is the expectation for now and he is meeting it.

So much for all the AFLs effort on equalisation!

Welcome to the free agency era!

It's the situation free agency has created. With the culture from AFL players shifting from being a one club player to prolonging careers and/or shifting to a winning team to be part of a contending team.

That's why it's so important to build a winning team, and not keep going back to the draft, hoping to get lucky.

 

[4#Didak#4]

So the search for a small forward continues. Seems like we have been discussing this for years, turns out we have. My thesis on the subject:

I think small forwards went out of favor for a little bit. Because of their specialised role I think they were seen as not fitting into the modern games need for bench rotations and flexibility. So it seemed to suit more to play guys who were midfielders that can play forward rather than pure small forwards. The idea being that the midfield rotations could be even greater. I think in theory this isn't a silly idea, and since the interchange cap and before that the short lived sub rule it probably should have worked even better. However.....it doesn't work as everyone seems to have forgotten that a forward small or otherwise needs to hit the scoreboard or there is no real point to their existence.

Collingwood certainly went well ahead with the midfielder playing forward concept and to a degree was a big part of our success between 2009-11. We had guys like Sidey, Beams, Wellingham, Thomas, Didak, Blair, Davis all playing forward at times but could also roll through the middle. None other than Davis & Didak could really call themselves "small forwards". Combined with our press game plan and some undeniable quality it worked...for a time.

I think we have failed to recognise that this hasn't worked since then. Malthouse carried this idea to Carlton where he famously offloaded/offsided two of the better small forwards in the game. He replaced them with mids & Dale Thomas and quickly became unable to score like they were under Ratten. He really had adopted the belief that pure small forwards were not useful....Eddie Betts disagreed.

I think Bucks has also continued this concept. We persist with Blair, who is not actually a small forward - he was and really still is just an inside mid in the mold of Luke Ball. He unfairly has been panned as being a poor small forward when he has actually just made do with what he has and credit to him, but he is no forward. We recruited Broomhead & Kennedy both I believe with the idea that they could be exactly that type that can play midfield whilst also being effective forwards. Problem is they were only OK at both - Broomy I still think can be a very good player but I don't think he is a small forward savior. We have no attempts at all to secure a genuine small forward.

Elliot & Fasolo are curious players, they will be put up as small forwards but the fact is they are better in the air than they are on the ground. Which is a great skill to have but being average on the ground is not enough.

We have had a problem for a long time where we are not converting inside 50 opportunities (even when we were winning). We generate a lot of scoring chances on the back of a good midfield. We lament our poor goal kicking but ignore the number of times the ball hits the ground and does not result in a score. Cloke & co have been immense at creating a contest and creating ground balls if they don't mark it, but nothing happens when it hits the ground other than rebound out. A good small forward converts these half opportunities into scores. It is a genuine skill that no average joe midfielder is necessarily capable of. We cannot afford to be wasting chances and with no small forward this is what we are doing.

There is also a school of thought that a small forward must #1 put pressure on then if they snag a goal its a bonus. This is absolute rubbish. A small forward number 1 must be able to have that uncanny knack of scoring a goal. Pressure can be taught. The idea of the pressure is to create scores, if no one is able to score whats the point? We need to find dangerous forwards first then worry about the rest.

My problem is where on earth do you find these guys. They have become somewhat rare. Do we draft, search the state leagues, watch "The Recruit" on TV or try and trade one in?

This should be a priority. I know someone of the quality of Rioli or Walters isn't just going to turn up. Do we look at someone like Brandon Matera? Or do we be patient and wait for Daicos reincarnated to take the game by storm?

 

[Knightmare]

So the search for a small forward continues. Seems like we have been discussing this for years, turns out we have. My thesis on the subject:

I think small forwards went out of favor for a little bit. Because of their specialised role I think they were seen as not fitting into the modern games need for bench rotations and flexibility. So it seemed to suit more to play guys who were midfielders that can play forward rather than pure small forwards. The idea being that the midfield rotations could be even greater. I think in theory this isn't a silly idea, and since the interchange cap and before that the short lived sub rule it probably should have worked even better. However.....it doesn't work as everyone seems to have forgotten that a forward small or otherwise needs to hit the scoreboard or there is no real point to their existence.

Collingwood certainly went well ahead with the midfielder playing forward concept and to a degree was a big part of our success between 2009-11. We had guys like Sidey, Beams, Wellingham, Thomas, Didak, Blair, Davis all playing forward at times but could also roll through the middle. None other than Davis & Didak could really call themselves "small forwards". Combined with our press game plan and some undeniable quality it worked...for a time.

I think we have failed to recognise that this hasn't worked since then. Malthouse carried this idea to Carlton where he famously offloaded/offsided two of the better small forwards in the game. He replaced them with mids & Dale Thomas and quickly became unable to score like they were under Ratten. He really had adopted the belief that pure small forwards were not useful....Eddie Betts disagreed.

I think Bucks has also continued this concept. We persist with Blair, who is not actually a small forward - he was and really still is just an inside mid in the mold of Luke Ball. He unfairly has been panned as being a poor small forward when he has actually just made do with what he has and credit to him, but he is no forward. We recruited Broomhead & Kennedy both I believe with the idea that they could be exactly that type that can play midfield whilst also being effective forwards. Problem is they were only OK at both - Broomy I still think can be a very good player but I don't think he is a small forward savior. We have no attempts at all to secure a genuine small forward.

Elliot & Fasolo are curious players, they will be put up as small forwards but the fact is they are better in the air than they are on the ground. Which is a great skill to have but being average on the ground is not enough.

We have had a problem for a long time where we are not converting inside 50 opportunities (even when we were winning). We generate a lot of scoring chances on the back of a good midfield. We lament our poor goal kicking but ignore the number of times the ball hits the ground and does not result in a score. Cloke & co have been immense at creating a contest and creating ground balls if they don't mark it, but nothing happens when it hits the ground other than rebound out. A good small forward converts these half opportunities into scores. It is a genuine skill that no average joe midfielder is necessarily capable of. We cannot afford to be wasting chances and with no small forward this is what we are doing.

There is also a school of thought that a small forward must #1 put pressure on then if they snag a goal its a bonus. This is absolute rubbish. A small forward number 1 must be able to have that uncanny knack of scoring a goal. Pressure can be taught. The idea of the pressure is to create scores, if no one is able to score whats the point? We need to find dangerous forwards first then worry about the rest.

My problem is where on earth do you find these guys. They have become somewhat rare. Do we draft, search the state leagues, watch "The Recruit" on TV or try and trade one in?

This should be a priority. I know someone of the quality of Rioli or Walters isn't just going to turn up. Do we look at someone like Brandon Matera? Or do we be patient and wait for Daicos reincarnated to take the game by storm?

I've found the right small forward this year through the draft.

Dan Allsop (Dandenong Stingrays). Could be there as a rookie and should be there late draft.

Absolute freak of a ground level player. Clean, one touch every time. Always first to the ground balls. Has the evasiveness and is someone you can't lay a hand on with ball in hand. Quick. Tackling and pressuring very good. He can become a more consistent finisher in front of goal and build up his body strength.

Perfect compliment for our marking forwards and is someone where if the time and development goes into him, he can be a genuine AFL grade small forward. And demand isn't so high that it will cost the world to get him. Ideal get and if I'm list manager the guy I'd target through the draft as a value get and an ideal list fit.

 

[Anzacday]

Knightmare email Dekka and delete the post

 

[Saintly Viewed]

I've found the right small forward this year through the draft.

Dan Allsop (Dandenong Stingrays). Could be there as a rookie and should be there late draft.

Absolute freak of a ground level player. Clean, one touch every time. Always first to the ground balls. Has the evasiveness and is someone you can't lay a hand on with ball in hand. Quick. Tackling and pressuring very good. He can become a more consistent finisher in front of goal and build up his body strength.

Perfect compliment for our marking forwards and is someone where if the time and development goes into him, he can be a genuine AFL grade small forward. And demand isn't so high that it will cost the world to get him. Ideal get and if I'm list manager the guy I'd target through the draft as a value get and an ideal list fit.

Like it.
The clean one touch is what really appeals.
Not sure if people recall a skill Jarryd Molloy had, he'd collect the ball clean off his feet or ground every time.
It's something I noticed, that's an aside, but clean ball handling is vital at the highest level.

As the year is all but done, I'd be interested in your take where Sier may be at?
Work in progress?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Knightmare email Dekka and delete the post

Derek should have KM on speed dial.

Or Siri

(Siri, call Chris....)

 

[Knightmare]

Knightmare email Dekka and delete the post

Probably too late having written about Allsop as one of my featured players in my AFL weekly wrap for ESPN. I also wrote another few paragraphs on him again this week - getting excited about his play again on the weekend. May be too late to keep my views of Allsop quiet..

In talking to some recruiters. He is not one of the small forwards mentioned among those more draftable with South Australia's Stengle and Allsop's teammate Fowler more fancied and more likely national draft selections.

Given that, if I'm selfishly talking from a Collingwood perspective. I doubt any positive comments I make on here of Allsop will have any further impact, if indeed my views have any impact on club recruiters.

Every year there are some who go underrated. Allsop is definitely one of those for mine this year. It feels like he can kick 5-6 on any given day.

Like it.
The clean one touch is what really appeals.
Not sure if people recall a skill Jarryd Molloy had, he'd collect the ball clean off his feet or ground every time.
It's something I noticed, that's an aside, but clean ball handling is vital at the highest level.

As the year is all but done, I'd be interested in your take where Sier may be at?
Work in progress?

Sier is very much a work in progress and probably a long term project unless he does a Patrick Cripps and has a freakish preseason.

Sier plainly needs to improve as a ball winner. He needs to win more of it before even at VFL level he can be viewed as an effective piece.

He is someone to retain given where he was picked and being on a two year deal as a new recruit, but he'd want to improve to remain beyond season 2017.

 

[Pies_Iceman]

Hey Knightmare,

Latest news has us looking at WHE and Tomlinson from GWS. Thoughts on these two?

 

[TradeDraft]

Knightmare email Dekka and delete the post

What Post?

 

[Knightmare]

Hey Knightmare,

Latest news has us looking at WHE and Tomlinson from GWS. Thoughts on these two?

They're both interesting but not sure things.

I'd view them as good gets on the condition that they're cheap with neither sure things.

WHE is interesting because he has excellent speed and endurance. Further to that he also has excellent aerial ability. So there is talent there. On the other side of things though, he doesn't find enough of the footy, isn't a prolific contested ball winner and lacks durability. Unclear best position at AFL level.

Tomlinson is intruging at 193cm with his endurance and ability to accumulate so effortlessly at his height (at least proven in the NEAFL for those who have been following his stats). He just at AFL level isn't proven in any one position. As a tall wingman he is intriguing with that endurance and ability to accumulate but is a below average ball user. He could also be a key defender given that endurance but needs to become stronger if that is to be his future. He has also played forward before and also up forward finds plenty of it but doesn't impact the scoreboard enough. So like with WHE there are questionmarks regarding best position even if he is better performed.

They're both developable, but there are holes and imperfections that make their futures at AFL level uncertain which as a rule I'm not a fan of.

My satisfaction with a trade for the pair would depend on what is given up to gain them.

What Post?

Immediately above the post of Anzacday.

 

[Pies_Iceman]

They're both interesting but not sure things.

I'd view them as good gets on the condition that they're cheap with neither sure things.

WHE is interesting because he has excellent speed and endurance. Further to that he also has excellent aerial ability. So there is talent there. On the other side of things though, he doesn't find enough of the footy, isn't a prolific contested ball winner and lacks durability. Unclear best position at AFL level.

Tomlinson is intruging at 193cm with his endurance and ability to accumulate so effortlessly at his height (at least proven in the NEAFL for those who have been following his stats). He just at AFL level isn't proven in any one position. As a tall wingman he is intriguing with that endurance and ability to accumulate but is a below average ball user. He could also be a key defender given that endurance but needs to become stronger if that is to be his future. He has also played forward before and also up forward finds plenty of it but doesn't impact the scoreboard enough. So like with WHE there are questionmarks regarding best position even if he is better performed.

They're both developable, but there are holes and imperfections that make their futures at AFL level uncertain which as a rule I'm not a fan of.

My satisfaction with a trade for the pair would depend on what is given up to gain them.



Immediately above the post of Anzacday.

Cheers for the response. Greatly appreciated.

 

[Prochard123]

Hey KM,
How do you think we will approach the offseason?
Will we try to move up the draft order in an attempt to secure a decent KPF or will we look for more mature recruits from other clubs.
Also, what do you think will happen to Williams, Cloke, Witts and the idea of getting WHE and Ed Langdon potentially?

Cheers

 

[Knightmare]

Hey KM,
How do you think we will approach the offseason?
Will we try to move up the draft order in an attempt to secure a decent KPF or will we look for more mature recruits from other clubs.
Also, what do you think will happen to Williams, Cloke, Witts and the idea of getting WHE and Ed Langdon potentially?

Cheers

I'd like to think conservatively but I'm anticipating from all reports substantial turnover.

You've got Nathan talking about guys playing for their careers. We're hearing about all these players we're interested in and teams interested in our plays.

So I think (despite my preference) that we'll be active.

Witts is in demand and can't get a game. So someone will grab him.

Cloke is in demand and also seems like he'll request a trade somewhere.

With talk about the club perusing a key defender (with Hurley before re-signing, Marchbank and now Tomlinson rumoured) I can't help but think Nathan Brown may be another the club move.

--
On the other side of things. Lin Jong and then GWS boys including but not limited to: Hoskin-Elliott, Tomlinson and Marchbank seem to be among those we have interest in.

Nathan also broadly has stated an interest in improving the clubs key position stocks and potentially acquiring a player or key position player or two this offseason.

--
I don't think there will be a realistic key forward to target this offseason. Rory Lobb and Cam McCarthy are two I'd target but can't imagine we'd get. Perhaps we view Tomlinson as a key forward? Beyond Tomlinson or lower level players I can't see anything big happening there.

--
Marley Williams I hope stays. He is in my view the clubs best general defender and someone I like the scope of to play elsewhere around the ground. He has just had a down year and his injuries that he can rebound from.

Ed Langdon has expressed interest in moving to a Victorian club. In talking to one of the Pies recruiters about Langdon in his draft year, the recruiter expressed no particular interest in Langdon at the time, so I can't help but think even with the clubs need for a small forward that they would pass on him again. His high disposal numbers this past month have been intriguing but I can't say I'm sold either with a mostly uncontested game - which often translates over time to inconsistent performance, even more so in forwards than other positions along with low scoreboard impact at less than a goal per game.