At this stage of his career I don't agree Beams is better than Shiel. Today or long term with Shiel the more durable, younger and better both ways. Beams is better forward of centre but not the better mid.
Roughead I feel was a wasted use of a list position and May I would have been open to but as with Beams he's not one I would have overpaid for. Had I been able to get two of Lewis Young/Sam Taylor(GWS)/Harrison Petty at a lower price I'd be tempted by those guys ahead of May. They're three I'd track strongly this year and consider as end of season trade targets.
Thomas I'd have been open to moving if it meant getting someone better. Moore at the prices being bandied around was a keeper, no one made a reasonable offer comparable to who he projects to become or even already is.
As always, thanks for sharing your perspectives.
Re Shiel vs Beams
Shiel was about the 4th or 5th best mid at GWS Kelly, Ward, Coniglio, Scully are all superior. Whitfield too these days. Never finished inside their Top 3 in the B&F despite playing 20 games a season pretty consistently. Treloar beat him consistently in the club B&F when he was there too.
He's quick but he doesn't hit targets that reliably. He has very little scoreboard impact either (9 goals a season on average the past 2 years from ~24 games). He has averaged 26 disposals a game.
Beams is a multiple club B&F winner, club captain, has averaged 20 games a season the past 2 years in a team which hasn't played finals (of which one game missed was due to mental health issues as he dealt with the immediate passing that year of his father). He has averaged 28 disposals a game and 19 goals a season. One of only 2 options you'd apply a tag to at Brisbane.
Beams is the superior player for mine at present. Pretty easily.
Roughead cost us virtually nothing in draft picks or salary. He provides important cover for Grundy and possibly Dunn until he returns. Recruiting for depth is entirely sensible and every club does it. If they're all superstars, you simply can't fit them into your salary cap and we have Pendles, Steele, DeGoey, Treloar and in time Grundy all commanding big dollars. In recent times you've seen guys like Keeffe to GWS, Preuss to Melbourne (basically didn't get a game at North and have Gawn), Adams to Lions, Leuenberger (when recruited to the Bombers), Mihocek as mature, big bodied players who may not have been considered best 22 but could play a vital role.[/QUOTE]
I have different ratings of the GWS mids. Kelly and Ward are their two best. Coniglio on 2018 form was better but Shiel's 2017 play was of a comparable standard and I don't see any meaningful separation. Shiel the better two-way mid. Shiel as a mid I consider clearly better than Scully and also better than Whitfield. With Scully and Whitfield they're along with Kelly those premier runners GWS have had, but Scully and Whitfield aren't the same ball winners or stoppages players as those others. Whitfield distinguishes himself from Scully as a higher level accumulator but also a much better ball user and now also the more versatile.
If Beams is on that 2018 GWS midfield, I would at this stage of his career rate him behind Kelly/Ward and slightly behind Coniglio/Shiel - all of whom have more advanced games at stoppages and are even better contested ball winners by comparison. Though Beams does have slightly different strengths and is the better forward. So his value when available would be comparable to Coniglio/Shiel.
If you ask me who I want out of those. From a long term perspective or for a whole season, I'd go with any of Kelly/Ward/Coniglio/Shiel/Whitfield ahead of Beams on the basis that they're all more durable and project to have more football left as they're all younger. Ward not meaningfully younger as only a couple of months Beams' junior, but he averages three games a season more and over the past 10 seasons has only dropped below 20 games once (2010) which is a great indicator not only of durability but probable long jeopardy. I also regard Ward the superior leader in a comparison to Beams with his inside stuff also better.
Scully with the ankle issue and even at the peak of his powers I don't consider in Beams' class as much as I continue to talk him up. He's not elite but he's a high level component who makes any team better and post injury while he probably isn't quite the same runner I feel can still be a valuable contributor.
You're right to bring up Beams (like Zorko) will sometimes cop a tag, and that lessens his numbers but Zorko I feel distinguished himself as Brisbane's number one option and the guy most important to stop on that Brisbane team and as a smaller guy he was easier to tag and had some really low with x8 sub 20 disposal games last season and particularly weak start and end to the season. And Beams has achieved plenty as you bring up and deservedly.
Why I talk about Roughead as an unnecessary addition (and he's much better than Rory Thompson who I spoke about earlier so I'm not going to diminish him completely - whether it's back or ruck) but Roughead also I don't consider best 22 at AFL level standard. There isn't a good team that should need to use him. In Collingwood's situation why I view Roughead as unnecessary is a combination of Grundy's durability in combination with Moore in my view being best suited to playing ruck and the guy I'd move in if Grundy has to miss at any stage, then there is the tallest guy in the AFL in Cox who I also feel would be very effective through the ruck and possibly better than he is as a forward. The game with so many guys these days being versatile is a next man up game. You don't need a key forward today. Cox could play through the ruck, Mihocek could play back and De Goey, Stephenson and Elliott could be your token key forwards and play that marking go-to target role. And with Moore/Dunn/Reid/Mihocek/Scharenberg all able to play key defence as well as Goldsack when desperate. In terms of Collingwood's tall stocks, ruck I feel is entirely covered and needs no further investment, Max Lynch I feel should actually have been cut as a low level unnecessary ruckman. For key forwards and key defenders I don't see the numbers as the issue, only the lack of quality with no high level KPPs, just a lot of guys who are adequate for AFL play but suboptimal by position. I hear Roughead is a good quality character guy who only adds to the club culture, but I'd have much preferred Alex Johnson be taken on as a rookie - even knowing he's out for the first half of the season, he at least wouldn't take up a list position on the senior list, but additionally is arguably an even greater character guy with no one in the competition wanting it as badly as him arguably and a better performer at AFL level. But again, seeing better options I don't feel even Johnson this offseason would have been necessary with Jon Marsh a better option again and now mentally ready to take his chances as a genuine AFL quality defender or midfielder with greater talent.
