Opinion Hinesight v Knightsight v Hindsight 2018

[Nuwanda]

I am a fan so i think Hore will do well at Melb. I think we overlooked him at first simply because we had Howe, Langdon, Scharenberg of that size and excelling at the intercept game.

Shame is that of that group... its evident now that Scharenberg is unlikely to play 100 games, so there probably was room on the list for Hore had they drafted him 2 years ago. And whilst not necessarily best 22, he would've been handy and played a number of senior games for Collingwood by now.

For this years draft they probably factored that they now also have maturing Murphy, incoming Quaynor, fit again Appleby and developing T Brown to fit in. Whatever the role we are just too well stocked for mid sized defensive options.

Yeah I agree. If Hore was taller, it would be a no-brainer in putting him onto the list. But he is under 190 cm and so can’t play key position and I think Howe, Crisp, Maynard, Langdon are all so much better and add a good mixture of marking ability, speed and carry and toughness.

Looking at Melbourne’s backline, to be honest I don’t think he is anything but depth there. And not forgetting they also brought in Kolodjashnij who would be a few rings up from Hore.

 

[Scodog10]

Yeah I agree. If Hore was taller, it would be a no-brainer in putting him onto the list. But he is under 190 cm and so can’t play key position and I think Howe, Crisp, Maynard, Langdon are all so much better and add a good mixture of marking ability, speed and carry and toughness.

Looking at Melbourne’s backline, to be honest I don’t think he is anything but depth there. And not forgetting they also brought in Kolodjashnij who would be a few rings up from Hore.

I’m not convinced KK has Hore covered myself.

He’s declined at a rate of knots since 2015 and like Hall I think the Suns were non-plussed about his exit. Hore on the other hand has gone away and gotten better year to year in the same time frame. If that trend continues Hore will be neck and neck in 2019 and he’s a better defender, IMO.

The kicker is there probably isn’t room for either in that Dees backline with Hibberd, Salem, Jetta, May, Lewis, Frost, O McDonald, Fritsch and Hunt in the mix and Lever to return.

 

[Nuwanda]

I’m not convinced KK has Hore covered myself.

He’s declined at a rate of knots since 2015 and like Hall I think the Suns were non-plussed about his exit. Hore on the other hand has gone away and gotten better year to year in the same time frame. If that trend continues Hore will be neck and neck in 2019 and he’s a better defender, IMO.

The kicker is there probably isn’t room for either in that Dees backline with Hibberd, Salem, Jetta, May, Lewis, Frost, O McDonald, Fritsch and Hunt in the mix and Lever to return.

It’s difficult to judge until Hore plays AFL. At the moment we are comparing an AFL player with a VFL player. Until Hore can get a game and show he can cope with the increased speed and better delivery into the forward line, not sure you can say he is even on par with KK. KK is a great get for Melbourne. I think people will be surprised and will get a reminder this year on how capable he is. If he can get over the injuries (he played something like 10 games in both 2017 and 2018) and is fit he will be in their best 22.

In terms of Hore, I still come back to the fact that the Pies have been in prime position to really understand his strengths and weaknesses and ability to translate that into AFL. The fact we didn’t believe he was better than others on our list suggests to me that his weaknesses could be exploited in the big arena.

 

[Scodog10]

It’s difficult to judge until Hore plays AFL. At the moment we are comparing an AFL player with a VFL player. Until Hore can get a game and show he can cope with the increased speed and better delivery into the forward line, not sure you can say he is even on par with KK. KK is a great get for Melbourne. I think people will be surprised and will get a reminder this year on how capable he is. If he can get over the injuries (he played something like 10 games in both 2017 and 2018) and is fit he will be in their best 22.

In terms of Hore, I still come back to the fact that the Pies have been in prime position to really understand his strengths and weaknesses and ability to translate that into AFL. The fact we didn’t believe he was better than others on our list suggests to me that his weaknesses could be exploited in the big arena.

IMO, if KK played plenty of senior footy in 2018 I could agree, but he played poorly at senior level, wasn’t a standout at NEAFL level (with his numbers comparable to Scrimshaw’s) and has big question marks over his long term health. On the other hand Hore was the second best defender in the VFL. Either way I’d dispute that KK is a “great get” he was a salary dump and was on circa $500k in 2018. On the balance of things that was a sideways move for both clubs.

On Hore I don’t take our supposed lack of interest as a sign of anything. For all we know he was the player we’d targeted with the pick traded to Hawthorn. We have a lot of depth in that area of the field and have traditionally avoided drafting out of the VFL (Wills is the only one this decade). Overall I don’t really see a connection to that and a suggestion his game’s exploitable.

In the timeframe Hore has become draft relevant we brought in Smith and Brown who have more limited all round games and Melbourne’s drafting out of state leagues has been much better than ours so I’d say them taking him is a greater sign of his prospects than us not.

The main takeaway for me is that it’s a moot point who’s ahead because neither would be considered best 22 at this time.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

I’m not convinced KK has Hore covered myself.

He’s declined at a rate of knots since 2015 and like Hall I think the Suns were non-plussed about his exit. Hore on the other hand has gone away and gotten better year to year in the same time frame. If that trend continues Hore will be neck and neck in 2019 and he’s a better defender, IMO.

The kicker is there probably isn’t room for either in that Dees backline with Hibberd, Salem, Jetta, May, Lewis, Frost, O McDonald, Fritsch and Hunt in the mix and Lever to return.

I believe they are looking at KK for the wing.

 

[Carringbush2010]

If the Pies really wanted another mid if Beams wasn't to join. Jarryd Lyons for a late pick would have been a much better value option. He's as a stoppage player actually better than Beams but not as damaging forward of centre - Beams is better overall, but not by a lot with Lyons in 2018 Gold Coast's clear best player. Aaron Hall another. Not only high impact but productive with high impact. For late picks, they would have been terrific.

Sorry KM I see this as opinion, even if you're purely using CD numbers:

Beams is a rare type of mid as he is both an in and under mid and as you rightly point out is damaging on the outside with his transition footy going forward visually more so than Lyons. Sure mids are not necessarily needed and we'd probably afford some of our fringe mids as trade.

However I could not see Lyons or Hall as a good fit for our team given Beams versatility, we have an Adams that covers Lyons game, and Hall is purely outside giving service I50 we have the likes of Sides, Phillips and Treloar for that and I'd argue Sides and Treloar have more impact than Hall. Sure that's my opinion but I think others would agree there's strong argument for.

 

[Knightmare]

Sorry KM I see this as opinion, even if you're purely using CD numbers:

Beams is a rare type of mid as he is both an in and under mid and as you rightly point out is damaging on the outside with his transition footy going forward visually more so than Lyons. Sure mids are not necessarily needed and we'd probably afford some of our fringe mids as trade.

However I could not see Lyons or Hall as a good fit for our team given Beams versatility, we have an Adams that covers Lyons game, and Hall is purely outside giving service I50 we have the likes of Sides, Phillips and Treloar for that and I'd argue Sides and Treloar have more impact than Hall. Sure that's my opinion but I think others would agree there's strong argument for.

On both Lyons and Hall, (against the grain - and I'm surprised it is against the grain honestly having watched a lot of both) but I'd consider them comfortably inside Collingwood's best 22 (or any best 22).

To grab my fully healthy best 22:
My fully healthy best 22:
B: Brayden Maynard Lynden Dunn Tom Langdon
HB: Jeremy Howe Darcy Moore Jack Crisp
CEN: Taylor Adams Scott Pendlebury Steele Sidebottom
HF: Tom Phillips Brody Mihocek Daniel Wells
F: Jordan De Goey Mason Cox Jamie Elliott
FOLL: Brodie Grundy Adam Treloar Dayne Beams
BENCH: Jaidyn Stephenson Brayden Sier Josh Thomas Will Hoskin-Elliott

Lyons and Hall pretty easily come in for Thomas and WHE. I'd only select Howe, Crisp, Adams, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Phillips, De Goey, Grundy, Trealoar and Beams (unordered) ahead of them. They've both for mine got everyone else comfortably covered at the selection table if I'm picking the squad.

I'd have loved Scully also and have him ahead of the rest. He could displace Wells after Lyons/Hall enter the frame and this team takes quite a large jump. Lyons would be the club's best stoppage player (top five at stoppages in the competition on performance) and Hall the clubs most damaging/impactful offensively (a rare player with his speed as a rare high impact offensively type with that speed but then he finds a rare amount of the footy for someone of his type). Scully when he's right to go would be the elite runner above Phillips/Sidebottom in terms of ground covered, running both ways, has better speed - he is another grossly underrated player and the competitions most elite runner. The only doubt out of those three surrounds Scully given his ankle injury, but if things go to plan he is back playing some time during the second half of the season - and he's a walkup start on any team in the competition as with Lyons/Hall. Or at least they should all be on performance. Scully is more widely accepted as capable, but with Lyons and Hall, as with a lot of players it's about appreciating them for their strengths and what they bring to the table, and they're two on the back of their points of difference who really seperate themselves and put themselves well ahead of many regular senior players. Scully's leadership and professionalism set him apart and make him an asset wherever he's at.

Just adding Lyons/Hall/Scully to the above unit I'd look at something like:
B: Brayden Maynard Lynden Dunn Tom Langdon
HB: Jeremy Howe Darcy Moore Jack Crisp
CEN: Steele Sidebottom Scott Pendlebury Aaron Hall
HF: Dayne Beams Brody Mihocek Tom Scully
F: Jordan De Goey Mason Cox Jamie Elliott
FOLL: Brodie Grundy Jarryd Lyons Adam Treloar
BENCH: Taylor Adams Tom Phillips Jaidyn Stephenson Brayden Sier

As I'm sure is clear. I'm a fan of all three and feel they'll each provide their new clubs with tremendous value and be the three most apparent bargains of this trade period.

In a comparison between Lyons and Beams. Lyons is the better stoppage player/contested ball winner/tackler. He'll win the clearances at a higher clip. All his inside stuff is better. I also like about Lyons that because of how contested his game is, he unlike Beams doesn't just perform well when the team is going well but he'll bring it every week and still go well when it's not going your way. Lyons just doesn't have as complete a game and while capable forward of centre and actually a better kick i50 than Beams (Beams is a stylish looking kick but not the best kick to target) and doesn't have as complete of a game and is not as damaging as Beams around the 50m or i50 which gives Beams value on this team as you can stick him forward and he's still playing good football. There isn't a lot of separation in my view in terms of onfield performance/value between the two. Where Beams separates himself from Lyons and puts himself in front in my view is from a leadership perspective with Beams having led a club, learnt under Hodge for a year, having that premiership experience. So if they cost the same thing - Beams is the guy I pick. At their respective prices in terms of what you'd give up, for mine it's a no brainer Lyons irrespective of list needs is the pick of the two with Beams overpriced and Lyons remarkably to me having no value.

And I don't mean to sound like I'm ragging on Beams. He's a best 40 mid in the game still and in the top 30 mid discussion. He's only behind Sidebottom and roughly in the discussion with Pendlebury/Treloar/Adams in a difficult to separate top end group at this stage of their careers, but Lyons and same goes with Hall has been blatantly disrespected by Gold Coast - each getting dropped at stages and then traded or in Lyon's case cut. I'm as a fan seeing this value very disappointed that Collingwood didn't go after the three. I'd have taken those guys, Jeff Garlett if I could have for another late pick and a Jon Patton for a late pick if GWS were paying most of his salary. All phenomenally underappreciated this offseason and all walk-up starts who make any team better.

 

[Knightmare]

On KK/Hore. They're both good and should get game time. Will be interesting to see whether both can fit. Competition will be tight at Melbourne. They're a premiership contender and high on my list of chances for 2019.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Quite startling all these terrific players GC seemed to have, or do have, yet they were such a dreadful team.

Maybe those terrific players weren’t that good after all.

Let’s look at some of them:

Lynch very very good but let’s be brutal he’s not a Lockett, Dunstall or even a Lloyd or a Riewoldt N.
He’s not even a Riewoldt J (close enough but Jack would be the better);

May, very good so will be an interesting watch.

Lyons, nice enough but I’d rather our second tier mids than him, eg Sier, bear will eat him up.
Adams better, prefer the run of Phillips, and not a patch on Beams. Forget that Treloar is easily preferred. Ofcourse he’s not fit to tie Pendles’ boot laces.
Must be, I just don’t get the Lyons being that good. Seems ok but then again, they are awful to watch.

Who else? They are a forgettable rabble.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Still scratching my head with Lyons.
From Adelaide (better side I’d presume) as just a player goes to rabble Gold Coast.
Numbers improve, can’t dispute that.
Less competition for the main mids I’d presume (though would get better opponents).

Dropped during season, and then chopped by Suns Dew.

• Something does not add up?

Overall average of disposals over career just under 20, matches Sier’s 12 games average.

Now off to Brisbane for Lyons. No, something is not quite right.

 

[Knightmare]

Quite startling all these terrific players GC seemed to have, or do have, yet they were such a dreadful team.

Maybe those terrific players weren’t that good after all.

Let’s look at some of them:

Lynch very very good but let’s be brutal he’s not a Lockett, Dunstall or even a Lloyd or a Riewoldt N.
He’s not even a Riewoldt J (close enough but Jack would be the better);

May, very good so will be an interesting watch.

Lyons, nice enough but I’d rather our second tier mids than him, eg Sier, bear will eat him up.
Adams better, prefer the run of Phillips, and not a patch on Beams. Forget that Treloar is easily preferred. Ofcourse he’s not fit to tie Pendles’ boot laces.
Must be, I just don’t get the Lyons being that good. Seems ok but then again, they are awful to watch.

Who else? They are a forgettable rabble.

Other than Franklin, there isn't anyone else in the competition I'd have in the Lockett/Dunstall/Carey/Pavlich/N.Riewoldt etc conversation. There aren't those other great key forwards in the competition - and that's in part due to the way the game has changed. But these isn't that dominant presence like that anymore at those positions.

After Franklin. I think you can put a line through that next group. Unordered J.Riewoldt, T.McDonald, Gunston, Hawkins, Westhoff, Brown, Kennedy, Cameron, Walker, Darling, Curnow, Daniher, Lynch, Hogan. It wouldn't be unreasonably to list those guys in any order. Lynch on 2016 form I'd rate the clear number two of that group, but on 2018 form - he'd be behind a lot of those. Put him on a good team and if healthy, he may be that second better key forward.

May is good. There are 2-3 top tier key defenders and May fits firmly into that second tier.

I like Sier and feel he's on late 2018 play best 22, but I don't rate him ahead of Lyons if I want to win a game tomorrow. Sier still has another year or two of development before he may be of Lyon's standard if things go right.

On 2018 performance I evaluated Lyons as Gold Coast's best player - ahead of an underperforming Lynch as well as May and Hall. I've never seen anything like it, but Gold Coast lost their four best players.

A healthy Pearce Hanley would be Gold Coast's best remaining player, but he hasn't been healthy these past two seasons since joining Gold Coast and isn't who he was in his prime with Brisbane. So it's a pretty depressing group outside of their first to third year players - and they're going to need a lot more veteran leadership around them to come on than failed players past who have shown early signs but not come on.

 

[Carringbush2010]

On both Lyons and Hall, (against the grain - and I'm surprised it is against the grain honestly having watched a lot of both) but I'd consider them comfortably inside Collingwood's best 22 (or any best 22).

To grab my fully healthy best 22:
My fully healthy best 22:
B: Brayden Maynard Lynden Dunn Tom Langdon
HB: Jeremy Howe Darcy Moore Jack Crisp
CEN: Taylor Adams Scott Pendlebury Steele Sidebottom
HF: Tom Phillips Brody Mihocek Daniel Wells
F: Jordan De Goey Mason Cox Jamie Elliott
FOLL: Brodie Grundy Adam Treloar Dayne Beams
BENCH: Jaidyn Stephenson Brayden Sier Josh Thomas Will Hoskin-Elliott

Lyons and Hall pretty easily come in for Thomas and WHE. I'd only select Howe, Crisp, Adams, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Phillips, De Goey, Grundy, Trealoar and Beams (unordered) ahead of them. They've both for mine got everyone else comfortably covered at the selection table if I'm picking the squad.

I'd have loved Scully also and have him ahead of the rest. He could displace Wells after Lyons/Hall enter the frame and this team takes quite a large jump. Lyons would be the club's best stoppage player (top five at stoppages in the competition on performance) and Hall the clubs most damaging/impactful offensively (a rare player with his speed as a rare high impact offensively type with that speed but then he finds a rare amount of the footy for someone of his type). Scully when he's right to go would be the elite runner above Phillips/Sidebottom in terms of ground covered, running both ways, has better speed - he is another grossly underrated player and the competitions most elite runner. The only doubt out of those three surrounds Scully given his ankle injury, but if things go to plan he is back playing some time during the second half of the season - and he's a walkup start on any team in the competition as with Lyons/Hall. Or at least they should all be on performance. Scully is more widely accepted as capable, but with Lyons and Hall, as with a lot of players it's about appreciating them for their strengths and what they bring to the table, and they're two on the back of their points of difference who really seperate themselves and put themselves well ahead of many regular senior players. Scully's leadership and professionalism set him apart and make him an asset wherever he's at.

Just adding Lyons/Hall/Scully to the above unit I'd look at something like:
B: Brayden Maynard Lynden Dunn Tom Langdon
HB: Jeremy Howe Darcy Moore Jack Crisp
CEN: Steele Sidebottom Scott Pendlebury Aaron Hall
HF: Dayne Beams Brody Mihocek Tom Scully
F: Jordan De Goey Mason Cox Jamie Elliott
FOLL: Brodie Grundy Jarryd Lyons Adam Treloar
BENCH: Taylor Adams Tom Phillips Jaidyn Stephenson Brayden Sier

As I'm sure is clear. I'm a fan of all three and feel they'll each provide their new clubs with tremendous value and be the three most apparent bargains of this trade period.

In a comparison between Lyons and Beams. Lyons is the better stoppage player/contested ball winner/tackler. He'll win the clearances at a higher clip. All his inside stuff is better. I also like about Lyons that because of how contested his game is, he unlike Beams doesn't just perform well when the team is going well but he'll bring it every week and still go well when it's not going your way. Lyons just doesn't have as complete a game and while capable forward of centre and actually a better kick i50 than Beams (Beams is a stylish looking kick but not the best kick to target) and doesn't have as complete of a game and is not as damaging as Beams around the 50m or i50 which gives Beams value on this team as you can stick him forward and he's still playing good football. There isn't a lot of separation in my view in terms of onfield performance/value between the two. Where Beams separates himself from Lyons and puts himself in front in my view is from a leadership perspective with Beams having led a club, learnt under Hodge for a year, having that premiership experience. So if they cost the same thing - Beams is the guy I pick. At their respective prices in terms of what you'd give up, for mine it's a no brainer Lyons irrespective of list needs is the pick of the two with Beams overpriced and Lyons remarkably to me having no value.

And I don't mean to sound like I'm ragging on Beams. He's a best 40 mid in the game still and in the top 30 mid discussion. He's only behind Sidebottom and roughly in the discussion with Pendlebury/Treloar/Adams in a difficult to separate top end group at this stage of their careers, but Lyons and same goes with Hall has been blatantly disrespected by Gold Coast - each getting dropped at stages and then traded or in Lyon's case cut. I'm as a fan seeing this value very disappointed that Collingwood didn't go after the three. I'd have taken those guys, Jeff Garlett if I could have for another late pick and a Jon Patton for a late pick if GWS were paying most of his salary. All phenomenally underappreciated this offseason and all walk-up starts who make any team better.

We have players that cover the games of Hall and Lyon. And some may view my opinion out of depth vs yours but I respectfully stand by my opinion that Beams is a better fit for our mid v Lyons and Hall. Agreed they're exceptional players and are walk up starts anywhere, the key though for mine is how'd they fit into a completely different game style at Collingwood vs where they come from.

And whilst Beams is also coming from a fast transition team style play, because of his grunt work he'd fit in relatively quickly - not to mention his familiarity with a lot of players on our list. That's not saying Lyons or Hall wouldn't I just feel Beams has an extra dimension to his game more so than those two........... we already have those types of players. Beams adds to our versatility (or unpredictably if you're the opp) in that we have the luxury of resting him forward and trouble the score keepers if he's not adding to the Adams grunt work in the middle (or even linking up on the outside)

I'm not excusing what we've paid to get him but that's the situation we have, just think Beams is a better fit for where we are right now if it was choice between him or Lyons and Hall.

I'd consider Thomas and WHE key to our forward structure more than Hall, purely because they know how our system is familiar to them, Lyons as good as he is would have a hard time breaking into that midfield I mean it bats so deep and like I said we have mids that can cover his game.

Remember we are not the most star studded list as it does not need to be, it's our style of game that is difficult to defeat and the versatility of the players able to cover injury - it's not so personnel reliant like say a WC.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Other than Franklin, there isn't anyone else in the competition I'd have in the Lockett/Dunstall/Carey/Pavlich/N.Riewoldt etc conversation. There aren't those other great key forwards in the competition - and that's in part due to the way the game has changed. But these isn't that dominant presence like that anymore at those positions.

After Franklin. I think you can put a line through that next group. Unordered J.Riewoldt, T.McDonald, Gunston, Hawkins, Westhoff, Brown, Kennedy, Cameron, Walker, Darling, Curnow, Daniher, Lynch, Hogan. It wouldn't be unreasonably to list those guys in any order. Lynch on 2016 form I'd rate the clear number two of that group, but on 2018 form - he'd be behind a lot of those. Put him on a good team and if healthy, he may be that second better key forward.

May is good. There are 2-3 top tier key defenders and May fits firmly into that second tier.

I like Sier and feel he's on late 2018 play best 22, but I don't rate him ahead of Lyons if I want to win a game tomorrow. Sier still has another year or two of development before he may be of Lyon's standard if things go right.

On 2018 performance I evaluated Lyons as Gold Coast's best player - ahead of an underperforming Lynch as well as May and Hall. I've never seen anything like it, but Gold Coast lost their four best players.

A healthy Pearce Hanley would be Gold Coast's best remaining player, but he hasn't been healthy these past two seasons since joining Gold Coast and isn't who he was in his prime with Brisbane. So it's a pretty depressing group outside of their first to third year players - and they're going to need a lot more veteran leadership around them to come on than failed players past who have shown early signs but not come on.

Very fair summation.

You are correct; me comparing Lynch to the Uber elite key forwards wasn’t an apples apples situation.
And Franklin is a step above anything going around now (assuming Lance is up and about. Elite talent and separately great to watch except against us.)

Gold Coast are in a big mess.
Player retention and development seems a big hole, sucking it all in.
Fears should be held for Lukosious and Rankine.

If I was them, I’d start from scratch and build around the new boys. That must be the plan.
I’d do a few cosmetic changes too, eg dreadful looking jumper design, and team moniker.
I’d move to a more classic traditional jumper and become, Gold Coast sharks.

Sends the message, we’re starting again and we plan for success.

They’ll unfortunately deprive Carlton of another wooden spoon I’d suspect this coming season. They look a Monty for last.

 

[Knightmare]

Still scratching my head with Lyons.
From Adelaide (better side I’d presume) as just a player goes to rabble Gold Coast.
Numbers improve, can’t dispute that.
Less competition for the main mids I’d presume (though would get better opponents).

Dropped during season, and then chopped by Suns Dew.

• Something does not add up?

Overall average of disposals over career just under 20, matches Sier’s 12 games average.

Now off to Brisbane for Lyons. No, something is not quite right.

Gold Coast have been all about defensive run under Dew.

The problem is - when you're not winning it. That's all you're doing. And if you're getting flogged every week, that's hard to do so much every game. And when that's what you're being measured on, on a bad team above all else. There will be some poor identification of a players usefulness. And that's what I feel has happened with Lyons/Hall. And it's not unlike the poor ID of all those Carlton players who left over a series of years and went on to other clubs and had success - Kennedy/Jacobs/Betts/Waite/Henderson/Grigg/Garlett/Robinson. I think it was for a stage there there may have even been more goals kicked among those playing for other teams than there were remaining with Carlton or some silly stat like that. Then Gibbs/Tuohy are now gone.

Running defensively is a component of the game, but it's just a component of one of the three phases of the game - with the other two being when the ball is in dispute to win and when you're in possession and driving the ball forward.

I'm not fussed if a guy is below average in a particular phase.

If they're elite in a phase. And Lyons is elite when the ball is in dispute and Hall is elite when in possession offensively. You're bringing something positive to the table and you let a guy play to their strengths and put them in positions to use those strengths to help you win games.

I feel the issue has been overstated with both. Lyons isn't quick getting back, but at stoppages if the other team win it, he's tackling at a high level.

Hall is more an offensive runner, unquestionably, but he's still covering a lot of ground in a hurry and the net offence gained I feel outweighs what is lost defensively as he's creating a lot of meaningful offence a lot of times each game. He's sort of your reverse Varcoe - Varcoe giving you little offensively but defensively he'll bring it and make a difference to winning, and Hall does it the other way.

On the comparison between Lyons/Sier. Lyons spent large portions as a forward only getting a regular go as a mid more so, though still getting forward minutes in his final Adelaide season in 2016. It was 17/18 that Lyons became a full time midfielder with Gold Coast. Clearances/contested possessions/tackles/use by foot and capacity to play forward are all better from Lyons. Sier like Lyons is one dimensional as a stoppage specialist but is still developing and even in his one trick not on that same level at this stage. I don't feel it's a fair comparison for Sier yet with this the first season he has played to an AFL standard v Lyons who has been of that or better standard these past three years.

 

[Knightmare]

We have players that cover the games of Hall and Lyon. And some may view my opinion out of depth vs yours but I respectfully stand by my opinion that Beams is a better fit for our mid v Lyons and Hall. Agreed they're exceptional players and are walk up starts anywhere, the key though for mine is how'd they fit into a completely different game style at Collingwood vs where they come from.

And whilst Beams is also coming from a fast transition team style play, because of his grunt work he'd fit in relatively quickly - not to mention his familiarity with a lot of players on our list. That's not saying Lyons or Hall wouldn't I just feel Beams has an extra dimension to his game more so than those two........... we already have those types of players. Beams adds to our versatility (or unpredictably if you're the opp) in that we have the luxury of resting him forward and trouble the score keepers if he's not adding to the Adams grunt work in the middle (or even linking up on the outside)

I'm not excusing what we've paid to get him but that's the situation we have, just think Beams is a better fit for where we are right now if it was choice between him or Lyons and Hall.

I'd consider Thomas and WHE key to our forward structure more than Hall, purely because they know how our system is familiar to them, Lyons as good as he is would have a hard time breaking into that midfield I mean it bats so deep and like I said we have mids that can cover his game.

Remember we are not the most star studded list as it does not need to be, it's our style of game that is difficult to defeat and the versatility of the players able to cover injury - it's not so personnel reliant like say a WC.

Beams fits well. No one will disagree. His capacity to play forward in addition to midfield and be a difference maker in both spots makes him a huge asset. No debate.

Lyons/Hall though I feel fit easily and I'm not sure they would struggle in the gamestyle. I don't feel like gamestyles are that different from club to club where you can be a good player on one team and not fit on another. It doesn't feel like the NBA where you can be Steve Nash/James Harden/Jeremy Lin playing for Mike D'Antoni and then not the same player for the next coach with AFL clubs in larger part trying to play more the same game. You can get faster and slower movement teams, and 2017 Collingwood was a slow movement team, but then you put Wells in there and the ball moves a lot faster and offence gets generated in ways that didn't previously before, so I don't really see compatibility issues as much as more generally as a team you want a blend of players who can do different things so that you can then put guys into the spots/roles on the field where they can maximise to the greatest level what they can do. And that's something Collingwood did better than in previous years under Buckley.

In terms of learning gameplans. The players have preseason to learn it but it's really in terms of Thomas/WHE what makes them valuable is having played enough games for this team they know the habits of their teammates and what they can/can't do better than outsiders would. No doubt. But I see the talent disparity as being so great that they wouldn't earn selection over Lyons/Hall. As I said before, there are only 10 players on the list I consider either as good or better while Thomas/WHE are 18-25 on list quality players.

Versatility is a point, though Lyons a bit like with Beams while not as good forward of centre can still play there, though you really want him at as many stoppages as possible to maximise the influence he has, and Hall while you'd stick him in that wing/hf role, he can be used as a runner off half-back if required. So I'm not sure even from a versatility standpoint they take away anything. Even from inside that best 22, and Sier would even if those guys were added still be in there, I'd be more concerned about how a Sier fits that midfield as he doesn't have a second position I'd feel comfortable using him as he isn't a marking presence with just the one contested mark and 18 marks from 12 matches and just the two goals.

Very fair summation.

You are correct; me comparing Lynch to the Uber elite key forwards wasn’t an apples apples situation.
And Franklin is a step above anything going around now (assuming Lance is up and about. Elite talent and separately great to watch except against us.)

Gold Coast are in a big mess.
Player retention and development seems a big hole, sucking it all in.
Fears should be held for Lukosious and Rankine.

If I was them, I’d start from scratch and build around the new boys. That must be the plan.
I’d do a few cosmetic changes too, eg dreadful looking jumper design, and team moniker.
I’d move to a more classic traditional jumper and become, Gold Coast sharks.

Sends the message, we’re starting again and we plan for success.

They’ll unfortunately deprive Carlton of another wooden spoon I’d suspect this coming season. They look a Monty for last.

Your thought process is what Gold Coast are doing. The young guys are impressing at training and leading the standard (which is frankly worrying). But they're being made to work hard. They've run already 50km+ more than they did this time last year. So the club are making them work and the players aren't complaining. So we'll see what eventuates there. They all seem from reports to have great attitudes and all seem to want to be there. We'll just have to see once the start losing whether there is any change from that perspective.

Gold Coast feel as safe a bet as there as been for the spoon this year. I'm not one for betting, but if I was, that's one I'd jump on.

I don't hate Gold Coast's jumper or song - compared to a lot of others anyway. I like the colours of the jumper - perhaps could be jazzed up a bit but if I don't mind it.

Re-launching as the Sharks is an interesting concept. It's something they could do. How much of an impact it has? It's hard to measure. I'd go off of the feel from the playing group. Something back of mind though for consideration, not something I'd dismiss without further thought.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Beams fits well. No one will disagree. His capacity to play forward in addition to midfield and be a difference maker in both spots makes him a huge asset. No debate.

Lyons/Hall though I feel fit easily and I'm not sure they would struggle in the gamestyle. I don't feel like gamestyles are that different from club to club where you can be a good player on one team and not fit on another. It doesn't feel like the NBA where you can be Steve Nash/James Harden/Jeremy Lin playing for Mike D'Antoni and then not the same player for the next coach with AFL clubs in larger part trying to play more the same game. You can get faster and slower movement teams, and 2017 Collingwood was a slow movement team, but then you put Wells in there and the ball moves a lot faster and offence gets generated in ways that didn't previously before, so I don't really see compatibility issues as much as more generally as a team you want a blend of players who can do different things so that you can then put guys into the spots/roles on the field where they can maximise to the greatest level what they can do. And that's something Collingwood did better than in previous years under Buckley.

In terms of learning gameplans. The players have preseason to learn it but it's really in terms of Thomas/WHE what makes them valuable is having played enough games for this team they know the habits of their teammates and what they can/can't do better than outsiders would. No doubt. But I see the talent disparity as being so great that they wouldn't earn selection over Lyons/Hall. As I said before, there are only 10 players on the list I consider either as good or better while Thomas/WHE are 18-25 on list quality players.

Versatility is a point, though Lyons a bit like with Beams while not as good forward of centre can still play there, though you really want him at as many stoppages as possible to maximise the influence he has, and Hall while you'd stick him in that wing/hf role, he can be used as a runner off half-back if required. So I'm not sure even from a versatility standpoint they take away anything. Even from inside that best 22, and Sier would even if those guys were added still be in there, I'd be more concerned about how a Sier fits that midfield as he doesn't have a second position I'd feel comfortable using him as he isn't a marking presence with just the one contested mark and 18 marks from 12 matches and just the two goals.

Excellent points Knightmare , though IMV you're underrating WHE and the possible potential of Thomas (still more development in him) and no I'm not suggesting they're as good as Lyons or Hall. Like I said we're not personnel reliant given the way we play and WHE and Thomas fit nicely, would Lyons and Hall fit better? We can only speculate, good argument though.

As far as our slow movement in 2017 that was probably in part due to our poor DE and in part very one dimensional game i:e grunt work it forward and get slaughtered on the turnover. Even taking into account speed with Stepho and territory with Phillips we move the ball faster with better DE and create turnover and then spread with said DE instead of just force it forward in inches and be exposed the other way when we gave the ball up to the opp in 2017.

Again we spent large on Beams so it's what we got and from a mid point of view I believe is a better fit than Lyons purely on the mid depth we already have and the rarity of Beams being both an exceptional inside and outside mid on top of the scoreboard damage he can bring.

 

[Knightmare]

Excellent points Knightmare , though IMV you're underrating WHE and the possible potential of Thomas (still more development in him) and no I'm not suggesting they're as good as Lyons or Hall. Like I said we're not personnel reliant given the way we play and WHE and Thomas fit nicely, would Lyons and Hall fit better? We can only speculate, good argument though.

As far as our slow movement in 2017 that was probably in part due to our poor DE and in part very one dimensional game i:e grunt work it forward and get slaughtered on the turnover. Even taking into account speed with Stepho and territory with Phillips we move the ball faster with better DE and create turnover and then spread with said DE instead of just force it forward in inches and be exposed the other way when we gave the ball up to the opp in 2017.

Again we spent large on Beams so it's what we got and from a mid point of view I believe is a better fit than Lyons purely on the mid depth we already have and the rarity of Beams being both an exceptional inside and outside mid on top of the scoreboard damage he can bring.

WHE needs to reproduce what he did in the first half of the season. His tackling is poor, his numbers for such a high level endurance athlete should be a lot higher and he needs to improve as a contested ball winner - but as a strong speed/endurance athlete and with his marking ability and early season scoreboard impact he can play. He just needs to continue using those strengths and improving on those weak points and get back to scoreboard impact more like his first half to the season.

Josh Thomas my worry is that 2018 was an outlier. If he can kick that many goals again, he can remain in the team, but I'm not sure he does.

In terms of the makeup of the best 22. I see a lot of interchangable parts. If one guy misses, or one guy is added, it's a lot of next man up and sometimes it might mean role tweaks to make that happen. So I look at it more as who is the better player more so than who plugs into a hole with the game becoming something closer to a positionless game.

If it's Lyons v Thomas. I see slight role tweaking. Lyons because he is so dominant as a ball winner you'd want to play a higher proportion of games in the midfield - and the result would mean Sidebottom, Beams, Treloar. You'd expect those guys would get more minutes playing hf/wing than they otherwise might. But Lyons would still get minutes up forward so I don't think that balance would be so bad and more making a great midfield situation better with a larger rotation of higher quality players.

Hall v WHE I don't see as much of an issue. If Elliott is healthy, he, De Goey, Stephenson. That's plenty to have deep in the front half of those non KPPs helping Cox closer to goal. Hall would be more a Varcoe replacement if anything and as mentioned before more the reverse of him - but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing.

The reality of what happens in a season is even if Collingwood had Lyons, Hall and Scully and WHE/Thomas/Wells drop out, they're probably still playing pretty close to if not every week anyway with guys always missing with injury anyway.

I'm against the recruitment of depth conceptually - and I'm talking completely against the drafting/trading/free agency pickups of depth in any position, but this is the kind of depth situation where the depth happens organically as you're improving your best 22 with some still good players who are of best 22 quality dropping into your depth charts just due to the competition for spots you've built. So it's more when you move guys back into depth positions that I look at such a situation as a positive because at the end of the day you're going in with an improve best 22, and sometimes with those guys who have been in there, sometimes it's someone else who drops out, or someone else doesn't get back from injury so that position is still yours anyway with the health of the likes of Elliott/Wells/Scharenberg/Moore always questionmarks.

I don't think 2017 was about poor DE (remember Collingwood were =7th in 2017) but there just wasn't the personnel capable of or willing to take on the game and the movement forward was a lot of short kicks, slow handballs and no real meaningful movement. Collingwood as in 2017 still aren't really a good kicking team. Better, but there aren't many elite kicks and a lot of below average kicks - particularly in defence there are a lot I look at and think - it would be nice if he was a better kick. It seemed like Sam Murray actually was the attitude changer, or at least as a watcher that's what it looked like to me, where it felt like guys watched him run and provide meaningful drive and it became infectious and the club's gameplan and attitude towards taking on the game really changed meaningfully to include more aggressive and faster ball movement which has led to the jump from outside the top 8 to grand finalist.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I don't think 2017 was about poor DE (remember Collingwood were =7th in 2017) but there just wasn't the personnel capable of or willing to take on the game and the movement forward was a lot of short kicks, slow handballs and no real meaningful movement

Whilst I agree with all of that, still what we have is what we have Beams vs Lyons and Hall - we got Beams and the recruiters obviously see a positive in that, hope they're right and if so I'd guess it's because they see the versatility that Beams can bring v Lyons and Hall.

That ranking is on the back of chipping the ball sideways and backwards to keep possession because we weren't able to move the ball forward efficiently like you have pointed out. Buckley even said as much it was to draw the opp defenders up the field (which didn't work) and when we did move forward it was poor DE that resulted in turnover and left us exposed the other way. Literally almost the identical list was able to do so in 2018, why? My guess is that DE on the link up after winning the ball was much better added to the fact we included speed with ball (DE) and territory with the likes of Phillips.

Sure on face value our DE looked good only because of what I've outlined, in reality our 2018 DE in the phone box and then on the spread was much much better................................ I might be drawing a long bow but I reckon the development in the off season goes a long way to that success.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Great discussion everyone.
This is the better part of bigfooty.

Eg: I’m not fussed on Lyons but now I’ll re-view him this season.
That’s what I like, being challenged on views.
Especially by people looking and evaluating players in a meaningful way.

Granted I just don’t view the other clubs players as closely as I do our boys.
So it’s good some do that work for me, thanks .

 

[Albert Parker]

I still don't agree with the contention that we spent such a large amount on Beams in a trade sense. In isolation, we gave away 2 (late) first round picks and received some picks back too, but we still got our preferred first 2 draft picks this year (Quaynor (who GWS valued at just outside the top 10 draftees and Kelly who we valued as a mid teens selection) anyhow given the points system and did not run into points deficit. His salary cap cost has also come in lower than his free market worth.

So effectively we gave up a net outcome of (we hope) a late first round draft pick in 2019 for Beams, a top 10 Brownlow medal vote winner in each of the past 2 seasons at a time when we are in a premiership window.

 

[Darkyprotector]

On both Lyons and Hall, (against the grain - and I'm surprised it is against the grain honestly having watched a lot of both) but I'd consider them comfortably inside Collingwood's best 22 (or any best 22).

To grab my fully healthy best 22:
My fully healthy best 22:
B: Brayden Maynard Lynden Dunn Tom Langdon
HB: Jeremy Howe Darcy Moore Jack Crisp
CEN: Taylor Adams Scott Pendlebury Steele Sidebottom
HF: Tom Phillips Brody Mihocek Daniel Wells
F: Jordan De Goey Mason Cox Jamie Elliott
FOLL: Brodie Grundy Adam Treloar Dayne Beams
BENCH: Jaidyn Stephenson Brayden Sier Josh Thomas Will Hoskin-Elliott

Lyons and Hall pretty easily come in for Thomas and WHE. I'd only select Howe, Crisp, Adams, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Phillips, De Goey, Grundy, Trealoar and Beams (unordered) ahead of them. They've both for mine got everyone else comfortably covered at the selection table if I'm picking the squad.

I'd have loved Scully also and have him ahead of the rest. He could displace Wells after Lyons/Hall enter the frame and this team takes quite a large jump. Lyons would be the club's best stoppage player (top five at stoppages in the competition on performance) and Hall the clubs most damaging/impactful offensively (a rare player with his speed as a rare high impact offensively type with that speed but then he finds a rare amount of the footy for someone of his type). Scully when he's right to go would be the elite runner above Phillips/Sidebottom in terms of ground covered, running both ways, has better speed - he is another grossly underrated player and the competitions most elite runner. The only doubt out of those three surrounds Scully given his ankle injury, but if things go to plan he is back playing some time during the second half of the season - and he's a walkup start on any team in the competition as with Lyons/Hall. Or at least they should all be on performance. Scully is more widely accepted as capable, but with Lyons and Hall, as with a lot of players it's about appreciating them for their strengths and what they bring to the table, and they're two on the back of their points of difference who really seperate themselves and put themselves well ahead of many regular senior players. Scully's leadership and professionalism set him apart and make him an asset wherever he's at.

Just adding Lyons/Hall/Scully to the above unit I'd look at something like:
B: Brayden Maynard Lynden Dunn Tom Langdon
HB: Jeremy Howe Darcy Moore Jack Crisp
CEN: Steele Sidebottom Scott Pendlebury Aaron Hall
HF: Dayne Beams Brody Mihocek Tom Scully
F: Jordan De Goey Mason Cox Jamie Elliott
FOLL: Brodie Grundy Jarryd Lyons Adam Treloar
BENCH: Taylor Adams Tom Phillips Jaidyn Stephenson Brayden Sier

As I'm sure is clear. I'm a fan of all three and feel they'll each provide their new clubs with tremendous value and be the three most apparent bargains of this trade period.

In a comparison between Lyons and Beams. Lyons is the better stoppage player/contested ball winner/tackler. He'll win the clearances at a higher clip. All his inside stuff is better. I also like about Lyons that because of how contested his game is, he unlike Beams doesn't just perform well when the team is going well but he'll bring it every week and still go well when it's not going your way. Lyons just doesn't have as complete a game and while capable forward of centre and actually a better kick i50 than Beams (Beams is a stylish looking kick but not the best kick to target) and doesn't have as complete of a game and is not as damaging as Beams around the 50m or i50 which gives Beams value on this team as you can stick him forward and he's still playing good football. There isn't a lot of separation in my view in terms of onfield performance/value between the two. Where Beams separates himself from Lyons and puts himself in front in my view is from a leadership perspective with Beams having led a club, learnt under Hodge for a year, having that premiership experience. So if they cost the same thing - Beams is the guy I pick. At their respective prices in terms of what you'd give up, for mine it's a no brainer Lyons irrespective of list needs is the pick of the two with Beams overpriced and Lyons remarkably to me having no value.

And I don't mean to sound like I'm ragging on Beams. He's a best 40 mid in the game still and in the top 30 mid discussion. He's only behind Sidebottom and roughly in the discussion with Pendlebury/Treloar/Adams in a difficult to separate top end group at this stage of their careers, but Lyons and same goes with Hall has been blatantly disrespected by Gold Coast - each getting dropped at stages and then traded or in Lyon's case cut. I'm as a fan seeing this value very disappointed that Collingwood didn't go after the three. I'd have taken those guys, Jeff Garlett if I could have for another late pick and a Jon Patton for a late pick if GWS were paying most of his salary. All phenomenally underappreciated this offseason and all walk-up starts who make any team better.

Must be my eyes but we really don't need a bloke who is brilliant at best but generally disappointing, a betting man will find that hall will be dropped at one stage during the year
Lyons SCULLY no have to disagree there

For balance trav and Mayne are both lay down misereres

Think Thomas will struggle this year

See beams swapping with jdg , whe on a wing with Howe , Adams b/p
Our trading drafting was strange but we did well with what we paid
To be frank beams is a deadset gun better than Sheil and can play back mid or forward
Rough head will suprise
Spewing we didn't get May
Should have moved Thomas and moore

 

[Knightmare]

Whilst I agree with all of that, still what we have is what we have Beams vs Lyons and Hall - we got Beams and the recruiters obviously see a positive in that, hope they're right and if so I'd guess it's because they see the versatility that Beams can bring v Lyons and Hall.

That ranking is on the back of chipping the ball sideways and backwards to keep possession because we weren't able to move the ball forward efficiently like you have pointed out. Buckley even said as much it was to draw the opp defenders up the field (which didn't work) and when we did move forward it was poor DE that resulted in turnover and left us exposed the other way. Literally almost the identical list was able to do so in 2018, why? My guess is that DE on the link up after winning the ball was much better added to the fact we included speed with ball (DE) and territory with the likes of Phillips.

Sure on face value our DE looked good only because of what I've outlined, in reality our 2018 DE in the phone box and then on the spread was much much better................................ I might be drawing a long bow but I reckon the development in the off season goes a long way to that success.

You're right on all counts and development is huge. If a large number of players improve as happened in 2018, with the competition so even, you're going to improve a great deal.

I still don't agree with the contention that we spent such a large amount on Beams in a trade sense. In isolation, we gave away 2 (late) first round picks and received some picks back too, but we still got our preferred first 2 draft picks this year (Quaynor (who GWS valued at just outside the top 10 draftees and Kelly who we valued as a mid teens selection) anyhow given the points system and did not run into points deficit. His salary cap cost has also come in lower than his free market worth.

So effectively we gave up a net outcome of (we hope) a late first round draft pick in 2019 for Beams, a top 10 Brownlow medal vote winner in each of the past 2 seasons at a time when we are in a premiership window.

Collingwood will feel fine about it on the basis that they rated Quaynor/Kelly at or above what they paid and felt like they got two first rounders. It's because I don't rate Quaynor or Kelly nearly as highly as they were taken that my view varies here.

Must be my eyes but we really don't need a bloke who is brilliant at best but generally disappointing, a betting man will find that hall will be dropped at one stage during the year
Lyons SCULLY no have to disagree there

For balance trav and Mayne are both lay down misereres

Think Thomas will struggle this year

See beams swapping with jdg , whe on a wing with Howe , Adams b/p
Our trading drafting was strange but we did well with what we paid
To be frank beams is a deadset gun better than Sheil and can play back mid or forward
Rough head will suprise
Spewing we didn't get May
Should have moved Thomas and moore

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.

 

[Scodog10]

I believe they are looking at KK for the wing.

Well there you go! Not the wisest of moves on his behalf with Carlton the obvious choice for that sort of change because a midfield spot at the Dees will be as hard to crack as the Pies.

Knightmare Witts and Harbrow are well and truly GC’s current best ahead of Hanley! Current strong form has to count for more than form of 2016 and earlier v Hanley. Beyond that it becomes more squirrelly. Not to mention that those two s**t all over Hall.

 

[Knightmare]

Well there you go! Not the wisest of moves on his behalf with Carlton the obvious choice for that sort of change because a midfield spot at the Dees will be as hard to crack as the Pies.

Knightmare Witts and Harbrow are well and truly GC’s current best ahead of Hanley! Current strong form has to count for more than form of 2016 and earlier v Hanley. Beyond that it becomes more squirrelly. Not to mention that those two s**t all over Hall.

Hanley when he has played has still looked good, but he's just hardly played. Given that, I'd agree Witts is their best. A fully healthy Hanley though should be best though.

Swallow/Martin/Miller/Harbrow/Weller are their other established players. I value Harbrow as a leader, but on performance he's too outside for me to rate ahead of Miller/Swallow/Martin.

And they can get something from those mature agers in Collins/Corbett/Burgess.

Wright should be fine.

Otherwise it's a lot of hoping the young guys come through in Lukosius/Rankine/King/Brodie/Bowes/Ainsworth/Crossley/Ballard. (Those guys should all in time be elite or near elite talents but how close to depends on their development). They're guys I'd pay a premium for as some of the most promising young talents in the competition. Those guys and Wright are the most valuable on their list with Witts the only established player of value.

 

[Scodog10]

Hanley when he has played has still looked good, but he's just hardly played. Given that, I'd agree Witts is their best. A fully healthy Hanley though should be best though.

Swallow/Martin/Miller/Harbrow/Weller are their other established players. I value Harbrow as a leader, but on performance he's too outside for me to rate ahead of Miller/Swallow/Martin.

And they can get something from those mature agers in Collins/Corbett/Burgess.

Wright should be fine.

Otherwise it's a lot of hoping the young guys come through in Lukosius/Rankine/King/Brodie/Bowes/Ainsworth/Crossley/Ballard. (Those guys should all in time be elite or near elite talents but how close to depends on their development). They're guys I'd pay a premium for as some of the most promising young talents in the competition. Those guys and Wright are the most valuable on their list with Witts the only established player of value.

I see that argument for Hanley being ahead of Harbrow as similar to the one for Wells earlier in this thread. IMO, you’re placing too much stock in what guys once were over what they currently are in discussions about who’s the better right now.

Hanley’s the wrong side of 30, has only had one 500+ possession season (2014) and his body is failing him. Harbrow on the other hand is like a fine wine and is maturing into a very good footballer. Each of his past 3 seasons has been better than the prior, he’s durable (61 of the past 66), has the leadership traits and is currently giving GC what they hoped they were getting in Hanley.

I agree with the rest in terms of where their list is at, but would probably include both Thompson and Sexton in that established group with Young and Murdoch on the cusp.