Fremantle in Disarray

[E Shed]

He seems to be building a great young playing group which is as much about the qualities of the players he's drafting as the way he's coaching them. Watch any game from the later part of last year. At every quarter change you'll see Hill, Suban, DeBoer, Pearce, Ruffles and any other of the great draft of 08 make their own separate huddle after the main one breaks up. Hill and Suban in particular seem to have the ability to inspire those around to greater effort. Great young players.

 

[footyfix]

For years I have blown off what these vic journos have said just as most people here are. But sometimes they are right and you don't get to realize it until yonks down the track. So now I half listen and ponder what they say. IF there is any truth to this, then whoever is behind it needs to be sacked immediately and publicly. If you're not with us then you are against us and should be given a massive heave ho!

 

[JungleMuffin]

For years I have blown off what these vic journos have said just as most people here are. But sometimes they are right and you don't get to realize it until yonks down the track. So now I half listen and ponder what they say. IF there is any truth to this, then whoever is behind it needs to be sacked immediately and publicly. If you're not with us then you are against us and should be given a massive heave ho!

Yeah!

I Am Spartacus.

 

[Marlin01]

I think I'd be more inclined to believe a journalist if they described the areas the coach was seen to be under-achieving in. If win/loss ratios were the key, the last couple of premiership coaches would have been sacked before they won a flag.

 

[roowatch]

In the week leading up to trade week, Denham repeatedly stated that North Melbourne was a rabble. North supporters who rang to challenge Denham could only get from him that North wouldn't tell the media what their strategy was during trade week (unlike paul Roos who repeatedly told Journos that the Swans weren't going to get Fevola but the journos reported that the Swans would get Fev every day of trade week) and that no one would talk to them about who was up for trade. Also mentioned lack of facilities despite driving past the new building every day (just being completed) and lack of coaching staff (didn't know the newly appointed coach had to win a race to appoint staff). The only "rabble" issue was medical support which did seem to have some basis for concern. So if Freo is in "disarray" according to Denham, all should be well!

 

[FreoBulldog]

Personally, i'm feeling optimistic about Freo's future with Harvey. It actually reminds me a little of what Clarkson and Bomber Thomson went through a year or two before they won their respective premierships. Both had ínfluential' people calling for them to be sacked. They had both not quite acheived the results that the fans were expecting.

To me, Freo are making all the right moves to set the club up for an decent run at the flag. I'm looking forward to seeing how the perform next year......just gotta get through those nasty first four games.

 

[JungleMuffin]

If youre surviving, youre not winning. We wont be going in there with a survival mentality. Well go out to win, and i reckon were more than able.

If we lose the first four, the next matches wont be any easier.

We have to win 2, theres no other option.

 

[Bluto]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...-back-used-goods/story-e6frf9ox-1225801660259

It must be nice to get paid to quote Bay 13.

 

[JungleMuffin]

How much of a w***er is he.

 

[Stronzo]

How much of a w***er is he.

Massive.

Essendon supporter?

 

[Moo]

How much of a w***er is he.

Just writing a puff piece for Victorian footy fans, just like our piss poor journos do when writing in The West.

If he thinks we are on the wrong track ....gives me even more confidence we are on the right one.

 

[Somethings Up]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...-back-used-goods/story-e6frf9ox-1225801660259

It must be nice to get paid to quote Bay 13.

I agree with the article. There would be merit to drafting Mcphee if we had a young team, but over half of our best 22 would still be 25+ so protection for younger players isn't an issue.

Harvey's in an unfortunate position due the clubs poor trading in the past, and whilst he hasn't traded picks, he's doing himself a great disservice by soley looking at bombers players that have played in an era when they;ve rarely made the finals.

ps Hutchison is still a flog.

i look forward to your wrath

 

[Moo]

I agree with the article. There would be merit to drafting Mcphee if we had a young team, but over half of our best 22 would still be 25+ so protection for younger players isn't an issue.

Harvey's in an unfortunate position due the clubs poor trading in the past, and whilst he hasn't traded picks, he's doing himself a great disservice by soley looking at bombers players that have played in an era when they;ve rarely made the finals.

ps Hutchison is still a flog.

i look forward to your wrath

No wrath mate but essentially we have taken McPhee for Foster.

Alterantively if we delisted Foster we would be using pick 62 in a compromised draft.

None of the young kids we have on our list appear to be 190 cm utilities so if we don't take McPhee it does not really mean extra game time for any kid on our list ...it effectively means more game time for Thornton and Dodd.

Foster is too injury prone to ever be of use, so he is not pushing out Pearce or Ruffles. He is a better player than Thornton or Dodd (now and in a couple of years would be my guess) so he makes the team better and he cost nothing.

If we didn't take McPhee and used pick 62 ...ignore last years draft as this certainly a compromised draft so it is likely to compare with depth to 2007 or 2004 - your chances of landing anyone capable of 11 AFL games is very slim.

Hey we don't all have to agree ...I was really anti most trade deals we have done but this acquisition is a smart one.

 

[dominguez]

Harvey's in an unfortunate position due the clubs poor trading in the past, and whilst he hasn't traded picks, he's doing himself a great disservice by soley looking at bombers players that have played in an era when they;ve rarely made the finals.

Realistically though we're taking Mcphee at pick 68 because that's the pick we'll pass on to use in the PSD.

With the draft age being pushed back pick 68 is like pick 80-90 in a normal year. So while I'm not phased either way on McPhee, he's really costing us nothing.

Also I think the Essendon thing is a coincidence. Obviously it gives Harvey a stronger indication of the players strengths and weaknesses but if someone like Luke Ball was available at pick 3 in the PSD we'd select him ahead of Smokey.

 

[The Night Shift]

I agree with the article.

Hutchy will be pleased.

 

[aussieviking]

No wrath mate but essentially we have taken McPhee for Foster.

Alterantively if we delisted Foster we would be using pick 62 in a compromised draft.

None of the young kids we have on our list appear to be 190 cm utilities so if we don't take McPhee it does not really mean extra game time for any kid on our list ...it effectively means more game time for Thornton and Dodd.

Foster is too injury prone to ever be of use, so he is not pushing out Pearce or Ruffles. He is a better player than Thornton or Dodd (now and in a couple of years would be my guess) so he makes the team better and he cost nothing.

If we didn't take McPhee and used pick 62 ...ignore last years draft as this certainly a compromised draft so it is likely to compare with depth to 2007 or 2004 - your chances of landing anyone capable of 11 AFL games is very slim.

Hey we don't all have to agree ...I was really anti most trade deals we have done but this acquisition is a smart one.

Could not agree more. a great post.

This is a solid pick which cost us nothing. Grover is finished , Dodd is injured. There is no obvious player that can play on third tall and also be capable of adding to our forward line when required.

I am all in favour of youth but we should pick up good players when they are available at a good price.

 

[DrJon]

No wrath mate but essentially we have taken McPhee for Foster.

Alterantively if we delisted Foster we would be using pick 62 in a compromised draft.

None of the young kids we have on our list appear to be 190 cm utilities so if we don't take McPhee it does not really mean extra game time for any kid on our list ...it effectively means more game time for Thornton and Dodd.

Foster is too injury prone to ever be of use, so he is not pushing out Pearce or Ruffles. He is a better player than Thornton or Dodd (now and in a couple of years would be my guess) so he makes the team better and he cost nothing.

If we didn't take McPhee and used pick 62 ...ignore last years draft as this certainly a compromised draft so it is likely to compare with depth to 2007 or 2004 - your chances of landing anyone capable of 11 AFL games is very slim.

Hey we don't all have to agree ...I was really anti most trade deals we have done but this acquisition is a smart one.

As others have said, this is right on the money. I posted the same sort of thing in response to Hutchie's article yesterday on the Herald Sun site but they haven't published it. They'd probably prefer:

Dockerz r shockers lol should be kicked out of AFL go bomvres!!!!!

Bez from Maribyrnong

...to anyone criticising their beloved Hutchie and pointing out the faults in his reasoning. McPhee is an inexpensive insurance policy. I also think he became a desirable pickup when it became apparent that Dodd would be out for at least half of next season. He'll be a direct replacement.

Also how does anyone know how Gold Coast is building it's list? Theylve picked up some youngsters and some headlines but the vast majority of their list is yet to be chosen. Just more Hutchie bullsh*t

 

[Chops_a_must]

yeh makes little sense. the only forces working against Harvey are the journalists.

Not really.

With keeping all of Grover, Murphy, Thornton, Soloman, Headland, not trading Tarrant although he'll retire after next year when we probably could have got something for him, he is walking himself to the gallows.

You could almost say he is putting his own his head in the noose.

We'll be far far worse in 2011 than in 2010 so the strategy for the next 3 years or so is just not smart, and makes little sense.

If we don't make finals he will be in a lot of trouble.

The naivety on this board is rather cute at times.

 

[smkwd]

How much of a w***er is he.

Someone at the club obviously denied Hutchy a reacharound at some stage... very poor effort and just another example of a journo with an agenda to push...

For those interested about his "coup" comment at the start of his "article", here is the actual quote from Harvey from another article (Caro Wilson believe it or not was impartial for a change):

''It has cost us not a lot, nothing really, to take Adam in the pre-season draft, and he'll be 29 at the end of the three years. People don't realise how difficult it is to get players of his quality across to Perth once they've spent significant time playing AFL football in Victoria,'' he said.
''This may very well be a coup for us. Not everyone wants to see football in a positive light these days.''

 

[Clay Davis]

Not really.

With keeping all of Grover, Murphy, Thornton, Soloman, Headland, not trading Tarrant although he'll retire after next year when we probably could have got something for him, he is walking himself to the gallows.

You could almost say he is putting his own his head in the noose.

We'll be far far worse in 2011 than in 2010 so the strategy for the next 3 years or so is just not smart, and makes little sense.

If we don't make finals he will be in a lot of trouble.

The naivety on this board is rather cute at times.

Good to have you back Chops.

I agree with you, but 2011 onwards is likely to be shithouse regardless of getting McPhee or not, or anything we do this trade period. I think the strategy that was mentioned on here as ensuring we don't receive a swathe of thumpings next years just as the GC come in is a very sound one, whether that's the intention or not.

 

[Chops_a_must]

I think the strategy that was mentioned on here as ensuring we don't receive a swathe of thumpings next years just as the GC come in is a very sound one, whether that's the intention or not.

I don't understand this strategy. Why does it matter? We aren't going to do anything next year, so why bother? We should be looking for 2011 and beyond, so why aren't we?

 

[dominguez]

With keeping all of Grover, Murphy, Thornton, Soloman, Headland, not trading Tarrant although he'll retire after next year when we probably could have got something for him, he is walking himself to the gallows.

The shallow draft gives him an excuse to keep the above players on the list but I would have preferred to see 2 of the above de-listed for players in the Broughton/Van Berlo mould. Better to have fringe players who are 22 than 27.

Whose to say there was anything decent on offer for Tarrant? Tarrant may just have been preaching to the masses but his comments at the Doig suggest that if he performs like 2009 next season he'll go on in 2011.

 

[Clay Davis]

I don't understand this strategy. Why does it matter? We aren't going to do anything next year, so why bother? We should be looking for 2011 and beyond, so why aren't we?

The only sound justification is that if we have another year like 2009, offers from the Gold Coast will look mighty tempting to Palmer et al.

Getting McPhee or not getting him doesn't change out plans beyond 2011. Whose spot does he take?

 

[dominguez]

I think the strategy that was mentioned on here as ensuring we don't receive a swathe of thumpings next years just as the GC come in is a very sound one, whether that's the intention or not.

Really though if we're not going to finish in the 8 then we're better longterm to finish 15th next season.

The Gold Coast get the first 3 picks but if we finish 15th we'll have pick 6 which is reasonable.

Worst case scenario would be similar to 2007 when we had no chance of making the 8 but still won 10 games after finishing the season well. If that happens next season we'll end up with pick 14.

Percentage will be interesting next season. Three teams could finish on 8 wins and one of them could get pick 8 and one of them pick 12 just on % which is a big difference on draft day.

 

[Clay Davis]

Really though if we're not going to finish in the 8 then we're better longterm to finish 15th next season.

The Gold Coast get the first 3 picks but if we finish 15th we'll have pick 6 which is reasonable.

Worst case scenario would be similar to 2007 when we had no chance of making the 8 but still won 10 games after finishing the season well. If that happens next season we'll end up with pick 14.

Percentage will be interesting next season. Three teams could finish on 8 wins and one of them could get pick 8 and one of them pick 12 just on % which is a big difference on draft day.

That'd be true if the threat from the Gold Coast was only their draft advantages.

If we have another shit season I would not be surprised if some of the younger blokes get sick of Freo and leave.