Kako and Bewick enhance our draft performance, but only a little. Right now it looks like Bewick will probably wipe our 2027 hand.
Our 2nd pick is last year’s, but in a weaker draft. There is a reason so many clubs were happy to trade out of it. In fact, if we’d accepted the Hawks offer 14 of the first round picks would have been held by just 5 clubs, with another 4 held by clubs who will use them to match players.
I don’t see any reason we’ll struggle in 2026. Back to 10-14 I’d say.
No Edge era?
3 weeks isn’t an era.
I just wanted to post a few things I think we could have done last trade period, for prosperity’s sake. Obviously, no idea whether there would have been any appetite for these moves from other clubs, but putting it out there as possibilities. I’ve tried to be reasonably conservative on value, the difficulty is:
Trades:
This means our picks would have changed from/to (before academy selections):
| Year | Actual | Proposed |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | R1 (Ess), R1 (Mel), R1 (Car), #43 | R1 (Ess), R1 (Ess compo), R1 (Mel), R1 (Car), R1 (Carl compo), R1 (Gee), #43 |
| 2026 | F1 (Ess), F2 (Ess) | F1 (Ess), F1 (Haw), F1 (Bris), F2 (Dogs), F2 (Gee), F3 (Ess), F3 (Gee) |
| 2027 | FF1 (Ess), FF2 (Ess), FF3 (Ess) | FF1 (Ess), FF1 (Dogs), FF1 (Col), FF1 (Haw), FF1 (Gee), FF1 (Bris), FF2 (Saints), FF3 (Ess) |
Then, re-expressed in picks. For future picks I’ve used 2025 ladder positions. For 2027 picks to allow for Tasmania I’ve assumed our #4 is pushed back by Tassie’s picks and one U17 pre-selection, that all top 10 teams are pushed back 10 spots, and 10 plus an additional 2 for each later round.
| Year | Actual | Proposed |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 picks | #5, #6, #9, #43 | #5, #6, #7, #10, #11, #20, #43 |
| 2026 picks | #4, #22 | #4, #15, #18, #28, #35, #40, #53 |
| 2027 picks | #8, #32, #52 | #8, #20, #26, #25, #27, #28, #37, #52 |
Effectively we would have traded: Merrett, Langford, Ridley, McKay, Caldwell and Wright our 2026 & 2027 seconds and a HUGE chunk of salary cap for #7, #11, #20, 2 x late F1, 3 x late F2, 4 x late FF1s (really 2nd rounders) and 1 x FF2 (really a third rounder). So really, #7, #11, #20, 2 late future firsts and 7 future seconds.
Remember, from a points-matching point of view, those 2027 picks will actually be numbered slightly higher (e.g. #20 is actually #17). It also puts us in a position to challenge the AFL on changes to matching rules on the basis “we’ve already allowed for 2027 in our trades”.
We would have had an additional 7 list spots. At the draft, even if we don’t make any backwards moves like Hawthorn did with their picks, we could add:
We’d obviously be much better positioned to hit the 2026 draft hard, and have more picks to match on academy candidates & Bewick in 2027.
We’d obviously perform worse on-field in the short-term, but that would just improve our draft position and give more kids opportunities. Next year we’d probably be looking for a Hodge, Lewis, Parker type player to come in and provide a bit more on-field coaching. Maybe Zorko or Dunstan?
Last weekend you would probably replace:
Maybe one of SEH or Farrow replaced by the state-league recruit (if any).
Definitely go worse, but would be a lot younger and a lot more picks taken and coming. The forward line might actually work better, as might the ruck.
Adding this here. I think this team has absolutely followed the North Melbourne “how not too rebuild” approach. Hopefully from this point Rosa can draft much better than they did, which was a disaster.
I was feeling pretty good about our young crop.
And then I thought about the amount of good young players in the VFL. Not many.
I’d say about 3-4 young players who have a future.
There is still plenty of dead wood to turn over.
The more first rounders the better.
Rosa has done a far better job in 3 years then Dodos entire tenure.
It’s going to be difficult but I have faith in Rosa
Moved to a more appropriate spot to debate with @dmaplestone and @whereswalla
Because you’re arguing the club has been rebuilding? If you think they have been rebuilding surely there have been actions you can point to that are evidence they’ve been rebuilding? I mean, you’re saying it’s undeniable we’re in rebuild mode - so presumably you can point to the actions the club is taking which prove this.
I’m happy to post actions the club has taken indicating they’re not rebuilding:
Well why not define one then yourself? Set out what a club who decides to rebuild does to separate themselves from business as usual attempts to improve the list. Port for example played finals in most of the 5 years to 2024. Three preliminary finals in 5 years. What would indicate they’ve decided to rebuild versus are just trying to improve the list?
I’ve been talking about needing to do a rebuild for years, discussing them on here and elsewhere, so feel well positioned to talk about them.
Likewise but only on the condition that Dodoro had nothing to do with the rebuild
This was 8 years ago!!!
14 years?
No wonder we’re all worn out and lost our marbles as supporters
I’d like to see the measurement criteria!
Wipe all nine. Just be good at football
Deliver.
Engagement.
Embed.
Maximise.
Purposeful.
Innovation.
Brand.
BINGO!!!
Didn’t they perform beautifully for objective #1?
That ticked every box on my wankword bingo card
