Fremantle in Disarray

[Chops_a_must]

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

It kind of does, I reckon.

Putting a crab on a 3 year contract doesn't really help. He would then be taking the spot of someone less crablike in 11 and 12. Well... you would hope... because if he is getting a game then, we will be pretty shit.

 

[Chops_a_must]

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.

Exactly. There was no justification for keeping someone like Soloman IMO.

 

[Clay Davis]

It kind of does, I reckon.

Putting a crab on a 3 year contract doesn't really help. He would then be taking the spot of someone less crablike in 11 and 12. Well... you would hope... because if he is getting a game then, we will be pretty shit.

I don't agree with the three year contract, so I'm with you there.

That said, I still believe he's better than a lot of our best 22 players that played in 2009 and would play in 2010. Dodd played every game in 2009, and Grover all but one. If Dodd and Grover went uninjured in 2010 I would guarantee they play every game.

 

[Slattery_20]

Thank you very much for your input. Did you happen to read the part in the original story where he was heard on a MELBOURNE radio station? With KB (From the TIGERS former Richmond - located in Victoria) who also happens to be a radio presenter and journalist, bagging the Hell out of Freo without 1 shread of proof? What is Denham's job? Oh yes, that he is right. He is a journalist!

Journalist in Melbourne = Victorian Journalist even if he was born in Perth and is a dirty dog of a Wet Toast supporter. I challenged him for proof and he said that he had heard from a 'source' and that was good enough.

The facts do not seem to matter much to him, nor to you it seems.

Denham is a prat. He's mates with Patrick Smith.
You should hear some of the stuff those 2 push about our club... apparently Lloyd is signed on a 3 year deal to the Bulldogs btw. And Knights has made everyone unhappy, Welsh has left to the Pies, Daniher's now our coach ETC ETC.
They've clearly got a poxy Essendon source who's still peed off about the Sheedy shafting.

If all 3 were on fire, and I had enough in the bladder for 2 of them, I'd go find a tree.

 

[theGav56]

MacPhee is a disturbing signal about Harvey's mindset and his inability to assess our list. his assessment of our list in his first year at the helm was way off the mark and cost us a year in rebuilding. If Smokey is recruited he will cost very little, but the posters who claim that we have no one else to play on the third tall forward are way off the mark. What is Solomon on the list for? If Murphy can't play as a forward and is not good enough for 3rd tall backman, why did Harvey give him a 2 yr deal? Where exactly are Johnson, Bradley, Thornton and Mundy playing, because any of them can do what Smokey will do? Why wasn't Drum given more game time last season?

 

[prattsta]

Exactly. There was no justification for keeping someone like Soloman IMO.

As was the case in 2007 they've taken a fairly middle of the road approach.

Only one of Headland or Solomon should have been re-signed. I would've gone with Solomon, guys who aren't injured 90% of the time can actually be used as depth players.

Re-signing Dodd the week prior to the trade period was also a mistake. Honestly, what was the rush? Was anyone going to trade for him? Would it matter if he nominated for the draft? Now that we're bringing in McPhee it makes even less sense.

O'Brien is VERY lucky to have been given a contract extension.

Other than a few supporters of the 2009 WAFL Premiers South Fremantle, nobody would really have cared if Murphy was sent back home to Victoria a year early.

As far as list management goes, that means we could have elevated Pearce and de Boer to the main list along with Broughton - taken two extra picks in the ND and two extra picks in the RD. The 'clean out' would more or less be over. Done. Finished. Completed. Next year we'd possibly have Hayden and Grover retiring, Thornton would be waived goodbye and younger guys who've failed to impress could be looked at. Sure we'd lose more than we win and cop some belting's but we'd be better off heading into 2012 IMO.

I've reluctantly drank the McPhee Kool-Aid since I'm a glass-half-full kind of guy, and there are positives to the acquisition, but it would make a hell of a lot more sense had some/all of the above been done as well though.

 

[DizzyHB]

We're already taking 6 ND picks in a shallow draft, how many do you want us to take?

What's the point in delisting depth players to pick up some more crabs that wont even get to depth level?

I do not want to be drafting like Richmond and picking up 14 new kids in this draft.

 

[E Shed]

^^^^
Yep

 

[Lach72]

True Dizzy.
And it's getting tiresome getting the snot kicked out of us, I must say.

 

[DrJon]

MacPhee is a disturbing signal about Harvey's mindset and his inability to assess our list. his assessment of our list in his first year at the helm was way off the mark and cost us a year in rebuilding. If Smokey is recruited he will cost very little, but the posters who claim that we have no one else to play on the third tall forward are way off the mark. What is Solomon on the list for? If Murphy can't play as a forward and is not good enough for 3rd tall backman, why did Harvey give him a 2 yr deal? Where exactly are Johnson, Bradley, Thornton and Mundy playing, because any of them can do what Smokey will do? Why wasn't Drum given more game time last season?

Before the season I thought we were definitely a shot at the eight in 2008; I thought the the 2007 season was a bit of an anomaly; we made a poor start which we struggled to recover from (the suspensions of Farmer and Johnson and the complete absence of Longmuir were particularly tough) and and the closeness of a lot of our games in 2008 suggested that the team was not as bad as results and the ladder position suggested. To those who criticise Harvey's ability to gauge the strength of Freo's list; it's easy to have foresight in hindsight.

 

[DizzyHB]

Our list management is fine.

We're gonna need a lot of delistings next year when the likes of DeBoer, Pearce, VB and possibly Sibo/Shep need to upgraded.

 

[Chops_a_must]

We're already taking 6 ND picks in a shallow draft, how many do you want us to take?

What's the point in delisting depth players to pick up some more crabs that wont even get to depth level?

I do not want to be drafting like Richmond and picking up 14 new kids in this draft.

Because there is this thing called the rookie list...

True Dizzy.
And it's getting tiresome getting the snot kicked out of us, I must say.

It's getting tiresome finishing middle of the road without playing finals, and without being a genuine threat, I must say.

You're all pretty much fighting against a rebuild which we've all agreed is best in the long run.

And it's exactly why we will fail again, and why Harvey is sealing up his fate and will be goneski at the end of 2010 - because he has deviated away from the required strategy.

 

[Lach72]

So, if we delist Foster, Thornton, Obrien, Murphy and Dodd this year, and don't replace them with a guy like McPhee, who came free, we go to the draft ( a weak one at that) and take 5 youngens at pick 120?

 

[Chops_a_must]

Our list management is fine.

We're gonna need a lot of delistings next year when the likes of DeBoer, Pearce, VB and possibly Sibo/Shep need to upgraded.

You make a case against your first sentence, in the second.

Why do we NEEEEEEEEEEEEEED a lot of delistings next year?

There will be a shitload because of this year's management anyway.

Would have been better to spread it out over this year and next, with more happening this year. I worked it out a long time ago, but it was going to be something like 15 move on notices over 2 years. So, we'll have about 9 next year... if we are serious.

 

[Moo]

Why are we on this downward spiral?

Don't get me wrong I am hardly declaring as flag favourites but all of a sudden we are going to drop like a stone for the next 2 seasons?

I don't agree with everything harvey has done but I am quite convinced he makes 2 right calls for every error.

Plus his 'mistakes' are minor in nature and basically come at the cost of a place on the list rather than a first round pick or trading a young player.

Harvey/Bond have played the delisting cards pretty well. Everyone was pretty much wanting:
- a knife put through the list in year 1 ....we would of been worse off if he had done it
- Mark J was an error but looking at the draft choices after him it hardly is a Schwabbalicious type list mistake
- He took 14 off our list in a year with a massively deep draft ...not too many other clubs have ever shed so many players in one hit

Timing has been pretty good.

Lots of comments here on Harvey's mindset. To me it looks like he is committed to (a) rebuilding through youth (via the draft) and (b) wants to get as competitive as soon as possible.

On (a) he has not traded out picks and thanks to that we are rebuilding the massive holes in our list (b) he has kept good players like Tarrant.

On the playing list I wouldn't have kept Solly and Des, but again the club has read the delist to talent ratio almost perfectly in the past 2 seasons. Club hasn't cut them all but Gilmore, Browne, Peake etc - the wood is being trimmed.

Finally McPhee, if you are buying into the argument that an elevation and then extra rookie pick in a compromised and weakish draft is of more value to the club than McPhee at the cost of a place on the list ...thank god you are not managing our list.

The time to elevate a rookie or two is next year when we in a weak draft do the final prune of Solly, Thornton, Murphy, Grover.

Plus I can not ever remember having such a good young core of players and leaders ...looking ahead a season or two there will be a lot of growth simply in them getting better.

You don't build a flag team overnight - if everything goes our way we are still years away ....however you become a good team first.

I am not ready to accept this we must stay at the bottom of the ladder and recruit the next batch of Gilmores on the basis they are young or keep Foster on the list (cos he ahs potential).

We have an average list but the critical mass of good players in that team is young. We are going to add another good young player this draft. I am not prepared to write off the next 5 years as easily as some.

TLDR posts accepted.

 

[DizzyHB]

I think you're completely missing the point Chops, especially with the rookie list.

This draft is as shallow as any from memory, we're already taking 6 picks in it because we need to find some young KPP's. However, taking anymore than 6 in this draft is just lunacy, there simply isn't a strong enough pool to justify it. Would you rather Thornton and Dodd as depth or the next Stribling and Copping taking up spots?

By keeping the players we've got on the rookie list where they are, we're enabling ourselves to take the best of the talent available to us as well as keep a strong rookie list. If we wanted to upgrade our rookies this year we would've had to delist even more players and we'd end up with a weaker list for next year and a rookie list full of crabs.

McPhee is coming to us for nothing and is in our best 22.

 

[prattsta]

We're already taking 6 ND picks in a shallow draft, how many do you want us to take?

7 ND selections - 4, 20, 36, 48, 49, 52, 68 plus Broughton, de Boer and Pearce as elevations with McPhee as a PSD pick.

Our rookie picks could then be more speculative as well.

What's the point in delisting depth players to pick up some more crabs that wont even get to depth level?

Our current depth players are NO good. They will never be any good. What is the point in keeping them? Honestly how is Ryan Murphy going to help us in 2012, when he won't even play a game in 2010 and won't be on our list in 2011?

Most of our depth players play the same position. Either HF or HB it's hardly a role that can't be filled by a 1st or 2nd year player - which would also be more beneficial in the long term.

I do not wanting to be drafting like Richmond and picking up 14 new kids in this draft.

It'd be 12 players, 1 of whom would be McPhee. That's 11 new players and 4 of them would be on our rookie list.

 

[Lach72]

7 ND selections - 4, 20, 36, 48, 49, 52, 68 plus Broughton, de Boer and Pearce as elevations with McPhee as a PSD pick.

Our rookie picks could then be more speculative as well.



Our current depth players are NO good. They will never be any good. What is the point in keeping them? Honestly how is Ryan Murphy going to help us in 2012, when he won't even play a game in 2010 and won't be on our list in 2011?

Most of our depth players play the same position. Either HF or HB it's hardly a role that can't be filled by a 1st or 2nd year player - which would also be more beneficial in the long term.



It'd be 12 players, 1 of whom would be McPhee. That's 11 new players and 4 of them would be on our rookie list.

Even with GC, next years draft is said to be stronger.
If we delist the crabs at the end of the year, upgrade guys like De Boer and Pearce, and then go deep, we'll end up with better results

 

[prattsta]

a knife put through the list in year 1 ....we would of been worse off if he had done it

I do agree with a lot of what you said Moo, but you can't guarantee this.

How do you know for example, that the club wouldn't of taken a shot on Ballantyne a year early? That one move would've put us in a better position right now.

 

[Lach72]

Even with the deep pruning we won 6 games last year...if this improves, as it should, by going to the draft as we are, to 8/9 wins with less beltings, in part as a result of getting guys like McPhee in instead of Thornton, I'm going to be a happy man.

This whole thing of almost wanting to get belted for 3-4 years as we rebuild is flawed IMO.

 

[dominguez]

What's the point in delisting depth players to pick up some more crabs that wont even get to depth level?

Players in the same mould as Broughton and Van Berlo who are in their early 20's and have played 30+ games in the WAFL/SANFL would offer more long term than Thornton, Dodd and Solomon and could be used as depth players next season.

 

[Moo]

You're all pretty much fighting against a rebuild which we've all agreed is best in the long run.

No we are not ...not one of us have advocated trading an early pick, and when we have moved a player on it has been for picks not discards.

To me this is the youth strategy rebuild ...in any year if we use all our draft picks (esp first 3 rounds) on kids and equally cut older players and play the kids who are ready - this is the strategy.

To not take a player who makes your squad better for free and instead advocate using effectively pick 100 ...yeah I don't remember signing up for that.

So he didn't trade Tarrant ...of course depends on the offer but at the end of the day keeping one of the best backmen in the league instead of playing Grover and Thornton as your 2nd key defender is >>>> than say pick 30.

 

[prattsta]

Even with GC, next years draft is said to be stronger.
If we delist the crabs at the end of the year, upgrade guys like De Boer and Pearce, and then go deep, we'll end up with better results

With what I've said, Thornton, Grover, Hayden, Headland and O'Brien would still be available to cut next year. Players like Hinkley and Bucovaz could also be looked at depending how they go next season. The year after, which will lso be compromised, we'd be able to make the call on young guys taken this year along with the likes of Tarrant and McPharlin.

 

[Moo]

Even with GC, next years draft is said to be stronger.
If we delist the crabs at the end of the year, upgrade guys like De Boer and Pearce, and then go deep, we'll end up with better results

Absolutely.

Lloyd has won me ...he called 2007 right and he called 2008 right, I'll back him to call 2009 and 2010 right too.

I do agree with a lot of what you said Moo, but you can't guarantee this.

How do you know for example, that the club wouldn't of taken a shot on Ballantyne a year early? That one move would've put us in a better position right now.

We will never know.

However look at the names drafted after our pick and the rookie selections ...we might of done OK but just one stuff up and that costs the place of Broughton in 2008.

Every crab we drafted in a shallow 2007 would of cost us a selection in a strong 2008. We may have snagged a Ballantyne but chances are we would of just grabbed some list fillers.

I mean the keeping of a few older players may be that the club do rate their chances in a GC 2010 draft over a semi compromised 2009.

2007 - moderate cut
2008 - massive cut
2009 - still a big cut by AFL standards

Dubai wasn't built in a day.

 

[Slattery_20]

Even with the deep pruning we won 6 games last year...if this improves, as it should, by going to the draft as we are, to 8/9 wins with less beltings, in part as a result of getting guys like McPhee in instead of Thornton, I'm going to be a happy man.

This whole thing of almost wanting to get belted for 3-4 years as we rebuild is flawed IMO.

But then again the whole concept of having a bob each way is too.
Results in a rebuilding year are by definition not the main issue.

There's no 100%, clean slate rebuild: it'd be suicide for a coach.